Re: fdisk(8) vs gpart(8), and gnop

看板FB_hackers作者時間11年前 (2014/06/02 02:01), 編輯推噓0(000)
留言0則, 0人參與, 最新討論串19/38 (看更多)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan Whitehorn" <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> To: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk>; <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2014 5:07 PM Subject: Re: fdisk(8) vs gpart(8), and gnop > On 06/01/14 09:00, Steven Hartland wrote: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan Whitehorn" >> <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> >> To: <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> >> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2014 4:55 PM >> Subject: Re: fdisk(8) vs gpart(8), and gnop >> >> >>> On 06/01/14 08:52, Steven Hartland wrote: >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Felder" <feld@freebsd.org> >>>> >>>>> On May 31, 2014, at 20:57, Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There's a sysctl where you can set the minimum ashift for zfs. >>>>>> Then you >>>>>> never need to use gnop. >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe it's part of 10.0? >>>>> >>>>> I've not seen this yet. What we need is to port the ability to set >>>>> ashift at pool creation time: >>>>> >>>>> $ zpool create -o ashift=12 tank mirror disk1 disk2 mirror disk3 disk4 >>>>> >>>>> I believe the Linux zfs port has this functionality now, but we >>>>> still do not. >>>> >>>> We don't have that direct option yet but you can achieve the >>>> same thing by setting: vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift=12 >>>> >>> Does anyone have any objections to me changing this default, right >>> now, today? >>> -Nathan >> >> I think you will get some objections to that, as it can have quite an >> impact >> on the performance for disks which are 512, due to the increased >> overhead of >> transfering 4k when only 512 is really required. This has a more dramatic >> impact on RAIDZx due too. >> >> Personally we run a custom kernel on our machines which has just this >> change >> in it to ensure capability with future disks, so I can confirm it does >> indeed >> have the desired effect :) > > So the discussion here is related to what to do about the installer. The > current ZFS component unconditionally creates gnops all over the place > to set ashift to 4k. That's across the board worse: it has exactly the > performance impact of changing the default of this sysctl (whatever that > is), it can't easily be overridden (which the sysctl can), and it's a > horrible hack to boot. There are a few options: > > 1. Change the default of vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift > 2. Have the same effect but in a vastly worse way by adjusting the > installer to create gnops > 3. Have ZFS choose by itself and decide to do that permanently. > > Our ATA code is good about reporting block sizes now, so (3) isn't a big > issue except for the mixed-pool case, which is a huge PITA. > > We need to choose one of these. I favor (1). I wasn't aware of that but it should do #3 min_auto_ashift is a bigger discussion. Regards Steve _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
文章代碼(AID): #1JYsfVLD (FB_hackers)
討論串 (同標題文章)
文章代碼(AID): #1JYsfVLD (FB_hackers)