On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Dan The Man wrote:
>
>
> Thankyou for suggestion Peter , didn't solve it, and no its not the disks ,
> I have been monitoring gstat and its doing what it should, NFS works just
> fine.
...
> Its always sitting in rpcsvc around 2% cpu doing what it should.
>
> Sam
Thankyou for suggestion Peter , didn't solve it, and no its not the disks
, I have been monitoring gstat and its doing what it should, NFS works
just fine.
Here is typical NFS session from tcpdump
07:13:42.192671 IP asterisk.nfsd > desktop.kink: Flags [.], ack 19048093,
win 29124, length 0
the kernel?
>>>>
>>>> It is 8.2-GENERIC so.. no WITNESS (for example)
>>>>
>>>>>I've been noticing a slowdown in some respects with NFS/SMB, but I
>>>>> suspected it was because I have an re(4) based NIC. ZFS has also
>>&
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
-- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
Right now (while experience slow writes via samba+zfs) thi
4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
Right now (while experience slow writes via samba+zfs) this is general
read speed off a 4 x 1.5TB sata2 raidz1:
# dd if=test.file of=/dev/null
13753502+1 records in
13753502+1 records out
7041793036 bytes transferred in 100.020897 secs (70403218 bytes/sec)
That
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:07 PM, "Daniel O'Connor" wrote:
>
>>
>> On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as
slow as Samba.
>>>
>>> - Dedupe?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:07 PM, "Daniel O'Connor" wrote:
>
> On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
>>> dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as
>>> slow as Samba.
>>
>> - Dedupe?
>
> Nope.
>
>> - Compression?
>
> On the mail spool & ports, but not on the t
On 11/09/2011 08:07 AM, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
>>> dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as
>>> slow as Samba.
>>- Dedupe?
> Nope.
You are probably right, but just to be sure, let's verify that with:
zpool get dedu
"The nice thing about standards is that there
> are so many of them to choose from."
> -- Andrew Tanenbaum
> GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C
>
>
Right now (while experience slow writes via samba+zfs) this is general
read speed off a 4 x
On 09/11/2011, at 17:32, Garrett Cooper wrote
>> dd's of large files (spooled backups going to tape) to /dev/null are as slow
>> as Samba.
>
>- Dedupe?
Nope.
>- Compression?
On the mail spool & ports, but not on the tape spool.
>- How much RAM?
8GB.
>- What debug options do
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 09/11/2011, at 16:56, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>> On 09/11/2011, at 16:29, Kurt Touet wrote:
>>> Is anyone else seeing problems like this with samba/zfs ? Perhaps
>>> it's not exclusiv
On 09/11/2011, at 16:56, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On 09/11/2011, at 16:29, Kurt Touet wrote:
>> Is anyone else seeing problems like this with samba/zfs ?Perhaps
>> it's not exclusive to samba, either?
>
> Yep, I see this too.
>
> I can get 80-100Mbyte/s
On 09/11/2011, at 16:29, Kurt Touet wrote:
> Is anyone else seeing problems like this with samba/zfs ?Perhaps
> it's not exclusive to samba, either?
Yep, I see this too.
I can get 80-100Mbyte/sec reads out of a single disk but ZFS is (now) very slow
- it reads & writes and m
vwv[ 3]= 4337 (0x10F1)
>>>> smb_vwv[ 4]= 1274 (0x4FA)
>>>> smb_vwv[ 5]=65535 (0x)
>>>> smb_vwv[ 6]=65535 (0xFFFF)
>>>> smb_vwv[ 7]= 0 (0x0)
>>>> smb_vwv[ 8]= 0 (0x0)
>>>> smb_vwv[ 9]= 1 (0x1)
>>>>
ight on this
Dan.
--
Dan The Man
CTO/ Senior System Administrator
Websites, Domains and Everything else
http://www.SunSaturn.com
Email: d...@sunsaturn.com
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvm
e)
>> real_write_file (torrent_downloads_finished/Point.Break.1991.720p
>> (1).mkv): pos = 83497201, size = 65536, returned 65536
>> [2011/11/08 03:24:00.070004, 3] smbd/reply.c:4639(reply_write_and_X)
>> writeX fnum=49966 num=65536 wrote=65536
>> [2011/11/08
ight on this
Dan.
--
Dan The Man
CTO/ Senior System Administrator
Websites, Domains and Everything else
http://www.SunSaturn.com
Email: d...@sunsaturn.com
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmer
enior System Administrator
Websites, Domains and Everything else
http://www.SunSaturn.com
Email: d...@sunsaturn.com
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan wrote:
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to ju
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan wrote:
>
>
> Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
> its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it was
> 15 minutes on beta3.
Hi Dan,
- Can you do more deterministic / scientific benchm
Updated from 9.0 beta3 to RC1 and using mkvmerge over samba/zfs
its taking over an hour to just mux in things like DTS english, where it
was 15 minutes on beta3.
Dan.
-
Dan The Man
CTO/ Senior System Administrator
Websites, Domains and Everything else
http
20 matches
Mail list logo
