Zen Bastard (jimbojones) wrote,
Zen Bastard

ZFS and RAIDZ performance

A comment on the Ars Technica Linux Kung Fu forum a couple of weeks ago got me curious - a user there said that as far as he knew, RAIDZ was not supposed to be a performance configuration, with RAIDZ performance not much better, on average, than that of any single disk in the RAIDZ.

I just happened to have a RAID storage server in the shop that was due for a complete wipe anyway, so I decided to take the opportunity to do some benchmarking. Somewhat to my surprise, ZFS turned out to be quite a good performer - despite its advanced data-protection features, it was the fastest filesystem tested for single-process reads, with or without RAIDZ. RAIDZ did quite well too; on multiple concurrent reads it is significantly slower than RAID5/ext3, but still manages to nearly double single-drive performance across the board.

Hardware used:
AMD Athlon 64+ 3500
1 WD 250GB HDD (operating system)
5 Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA-II HDD (RAID array drives)

Operating systems used:
FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE amd64 (UFS2 and ZFS testing)
Ubuntu Server 8.04-LTS amd64 (ext3fs testing)

no filesystem tuning was done for any test - all filesystems were left in their default configuration.

Tags: alpha geek, freebsd, linux

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded