Uneven load on drives in ZFS RAIDZ1
Garrett Cooper
yanegomi at gmail.com
Mon Dec 19 17:05:21 UTC 2011
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Stefan Esser <se at freebsd.org> wrote:
> Hi ZFS users,
>
> for quite some time I have observed an uneven distribution of load
> between drives in a 4 * 2TB RAIDZ1 pool. The following is an excerpt of
> a longer log of 10 second averages logged with gstat:
>
> dT: 10.001s w: 10.000s filter: ^a?da?.$
> L(q) ops/s r/s kBps ms/r w/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
> 0 130 106 4134 4.5 23 1033 5.2 48.8| ada0
> 0 131 111 3784 4.2 19 1007 4.0 47.6| ada1
> 0 90 66 2219 4.5 24 1031 5.1 31.7| ada2
> 1 81 58 2007 4.6 22 1023 2.3 28.1| ada3
>
> L(q) ops/s r/s kBps ms/r w/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
> 1 132 104 4036 4.2 27 1129 5.3 45.2| ada0
> 0 129 103 3679 4.5 26 1115 6.8 47.6| ada1
> 1 91 61 2133 4.6 30 1129 1.9 29.6| ada2
> 0 81 56 1985 4.8 24 1102 6.0 29.4| ada3
>
> L(q) ops/s r/s kBps ms/r w/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
> 1 148 108 4084 5.3 39 2511 7.2 55.5| ada0
> 1 141 104 3693 5.1 36 2505 10.4 54.4| ada1
> 1 102 62 2112 5.6 39 2508 5.5 35.4| ada2
> 0 99 60 2064 6.0 39 2483 3.7 36.1| ada3
This suggests (note that I said suggests) that there might be a slight
difference in the data path speeds or physical media as someone else
suggested; look at zpool iostat -v <interval> though before making a
firm statement as to whether or not a drive is truly not performing to
your assumed spec. gstat and zpool iostat -v suggest performance
though -- they aren't the end-all-be-all for determining drive
performance.
If the latency numbers were high enough, I would suggest dd'ing out to
the individual drives (i.e. remove the drive from the RAIDZ) to see if
there's a noticeable discrepancy, as this can indicate a bad cable,
backplane, or drive; from there I would start doing the physical swap
routine and see if the issue moves with the drive or stays static with
the controller channel and/or chassis slot.
Cheers,
-Garrett
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list