dead slow update servers

[hw]

"Kevin P. Neal" <kpn at neutralgood.org> writes:

> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 05:39:51AM +0200, hw wrote:
>> ZFS is great when you have JBODs while storage performance is
>> irrelevant.  I do not have JBODs, and in almost all cases, storage
>> performance is relevant.
>
> Huh? Is a _properly_ _designed_ ZFS setup really slower? A raidz
> setup of N drives gets you the performance of roughly 1 drive, but a
> mirror gets you the write performance of a titch less than one drive
> with the read performance of N drives. How does ZFS hurt performance?

Performance is hurt when you have N disks and only get the performance
of a single disk from them.

Mirroring the N disks would require another N disks, which you don't
have.

"Performance" isn't much better defined as "properly designed" here.  In
practise, I prefer a hardware RAID5 with N disks over a raidz with N
disks and a RAID10 over a RAID5.  Unfortunately, in practise, the number
of disks is limited because they aren't cheap and because only so many
disks can be connected to a machine without further ado while there is a
certain requirement for storage capacity.  Reality is not proper
designed :/


What do you do when you put FreeBSD on a server that has a hardware RAID
controller which doesn't do JBOD?  Use ZFS on the RAID?