Since I don't have have a 3510 sitting around to test on, I decided to do a quick benchmark on a spare partition of my laptop to compare ZFS and UFS. We have all been told that ZFS is faster than UFS, but by how much and when is a interesting question.
Using filebench as Robert did, I have started with the varmail workload using the average of three runs to produce the graph below. For each run I created the pool (ZFS) and filesystem, did the three benchmark runs for 60 seconds each, and then destroyed the partition for the next benchmark test.
For ZFS this was
root> zpool create -fm /none benchpool /dev/dsk/c0d0s4
root> zfs create benchpool/mnt
root> zfs set mountpoint=/mnt benchpool/mnt
root> # Set options zfs options e.g. zfs set atime=off benchpool/mnt
root> /opt/filebench/bin/filebench
filebench> load varmail
filebench> set $dir=/mnt/zfstest
filebench> run 60
root> zfs destroy benchpool/mnt
root> zpool destroy benchpool
For UFS -
root> newfs /dev/dsk/c0d0s4
root> mount -o noatime -F ufs /dev/dsk/c0d0s4 /mnt
root> # -o noatime is the option for this test
root> /opt/filebench/bin/filebench
filebench> load varmail
filebench> set $dir=/mnt/zfstest
filebench> run 60
root> umount /mnt
As you can see ZFS is indeed faster for this benchmark than UFS. To be fair, and to compare apples to apples, I should have combined UFS with the Solaris Volume Manager (SVM). This most likely seen a greater gap between ZFS and UFS. One thing it shows, is that a Acer Ferrari 4005 maybe a nice laptop, but it makes a horrible mailserver :(
No comments:
Post a Comment