Anyone using HAST in production / performance?

[Karl Pielorz]

--On 6 May 2014 11:43:42 +0100 Pete French <petefrench at ingresso.co.uk> 
wrote:

>> I guess if you're just using the zool 'locally' - that 31Mbyte/sec may
>> be  close to the performance you're getting [estimated]?
>
> I just diud a very unscientific test - dd of /dev/random into a fle,
> and I see about 30 meg/second in gstat, and the end result
> is about that too, so well guessed ;)

Yeah, not a bad guess :) - Looks like I'm not doing anything 'obviously' 
wrong - it's just going as fast as it does...

>> What version of FreeBSD are you using? I'm just wondering if that's
>> making  a difference...
>
> 9.2 - from the day after heartbleed came out. 10k drives, gig
> ether between the boxes.

Looks like I'm back to looking at iSCSI -> ZFS then for now. HAST has coped 
with everything I've thrown at it ('failure' wise) but I need more speed 
than that as storage for VM's etc.

Thanks for the info anyway,

-Karl