Re: Bond Issues

["nate" <centos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

aurfalien@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> You mind running Bonnie on your Exanet?
>
> We can compare charts, Exanet vs Bluearc,
>
> Lemme know so I can start preparing the test.

Our system is slammed almost 24/7(our disks are sustaining
60ms service times for writes, though front end write response
times is around 2-3ms) so I can't get accurate numbers for
you. From a blog entry of mine:
http://www.techopsguys.com/2009/08/04/123/

I can send you (off-list) some basic iozone numbers
I took in the early days of testing, I didn't have the
best settings at the time so a lot of is is from cache,
not from disk. I plan to add another 100 disks early next
year and re-stripe all of the data that should dramatically
improve performance.

"better" results are probably gotten from SpecSFS numbers
at least you can get something decent to compare with
though BlueArc hasn't posted numbers with the new version
yet:
http://www.spec.org/sfs2008/results/

As I mentioned in another email I don't think the bottleneck
is the NAS, it's the disks. Given the load we see today I
could double the spindle count to 400 disks(SATA-II) and
still not max out a two node Exanet cluster.

nate

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos