On 12/09/2017 16:37, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
ZFS with zpolls with thin with thinpools running directly on top of device.
If zpools - are 'equally' fast as thins - and gives you better protection,
and more sane logic the why is still anyone using thins???
I'd really love to see some benchmarks....
Of course if you slow down speed of thin-pool and add way more
synchronization points and consume 10x more memory :) you can get better
behavior in those exceptional cases which are only hit by unexperienced
users who tends to intentionally use thin-pools in incorrect way.....
Having benchmarked them, I can reply :)
ZFS/ZVOLs surely are slower than thinp, full stop.
However, they are not *massively* slower.
To tell the truth, what somewhat slow me on ZFS adoption is its low
integration in the Linux kernel subsystem. For example:
- cache duplication (ARC + pagecache)
- slow reclaim of memory used for caching
- SPL (sun porting layer)
- dependency on 3rd part module
...
Thinp is great tech - and I am already using it. I did not started this
thread as ZFS vs Thinp, really. Rather, I would like to understand how
to better use thinp, and I traced a parallelism with ZVOLs, nothing more.
Thanks.
--
--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti@assyoma.it - info@assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
