MFC of ZFSv15
mh at kernel32.de
Thu Sep 16 11:18:12 UTC 2010
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 12:42:36 +0200, Guido Falsi <mad at madpilot.net>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:53:02AM +0100, Marian Hettwer wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 10:42:40 +0200, Guido Falsi <mad at madpilot.net>
>> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 07:44:31AM +0200, Martin Matuska wrote:
>> >> I have fixed the missing bits in r212688.
>> >> Thanks for the notice.
>> > Just a thank you message for the v15 development, MFS and this fast
>> > fix. Maybe this is just noise on the lists, but I think that too
>> > little thanks get to the FreeBSD developers, so a little noise like
>> > this may be beneficial.
>> Agreed to that! Thanks for all the efforts in bringing ZFS to FreeBSD.
>> I'm running 8.1-Release with v15 without any problems.
>> I just copied a 21GB MySQL datadir from a linux box to my FreeBSD/zfs
>> workstation. Thanks to zfs compression the 21GB only consume 10GB on
>> That's massive compression :-)
> Related to this, I have a question.
Related, but on its way to get off topic...
> Is it convenient to put databases on a compresed filesystem? Apart from
> the space advantage, does it give any speed advantage/penalty?
At work we use Solaris 10 with zfs and compression enabled for our
All InnoDB. No speed penalty and only really slight advantages. I tend
to say, it doesn't matter.
It gives you more disk space by a wee bit of more CPU consumption.
On the other hand, CPU is usually not your problem in a heavy load
It's disc seek times...
> Anyone has some benchmark or objective data about this?
No benchmarks and no time right now to come up with some fancy graphs.
> Also are we talking about MyISAM or InnoDB tables? Or a mix of those?
More information about the freebsd-stable