Recent content by loadit

zrav, k0nf1gt: Its funny... after that post of zambanini over 2 years ago I stopped coming back to this forum because I actually felt offended. I did not even saw the other posts by you guys later on. But thanks a lot if I would have seen them I am sure I would have stayed here. The last two...

Since you do know that I am benchmarking wrong. And have no Idea about NFS and I am here to learn and you seam to know the right way. Why don't you enlighten my so call "lazy ass" (fauler sack)

@zambanini: thanks for the advice. I have been looking for the Intel DC P3700 (800GB) but I really like to first try out some stuff with the ESXi server. Can you also explain to my. Why I get 1.1 GByte/Sec on my NFS Store thru my Ubuntu Client. But on the ESXi Hypervisor I only get bloody 100 -...

@_Gea: I don't use physical LAN for this vSAN. Its all based on virtual Switches with no Physical Adapter. I can iperf over 20GBits... In a single thread. @omniscence: Maybe u are right. But still the VMs on the mounted NFS store feel horrible slow... Can u tell me how I can messure the...

But how do other people solve this Issue. I can not belive I am the only person who thinks 100 MByte/Sec is to slow for even a ESXi Lab Whitebox... Especially if you have 8 SSDs inside...

@omniscence so what you are telling me. Since I need the sync writes... it is not possible? At least not with this hardware configuration?

But how do I get my ESXi to achive the same speed as my VM? I can't belive that can be so hard to do...

Should I switch to iSCSI?

Okay, I will do that. But is what I am trying even possibel? To use the NFS 1GByte/Sec I get back on my ESXi Host? Or should I just switch back the RAID controller to RAID Mode and use the Array directly in the Hypervisor?

I just tried to turn off the sync completly with sync=disabled on the test pool. Result is 2x the speed... but far away from what I get from my VM... /vmfs/volumes/32b6373b-96c1d255 # time sh -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=tempfile bs=1M count=4096" 4096+0 records in 4096+0 records out real 0m...

Is this "overflow protection (reservation, use max 90%)" the option for this? Or do I have to do that with one of these tools (hdat2, hdparm -N)? I ran again some tests. On the napp-it appliance itself I get with compression around 2.0 - 2.2 GByte/Sec in DD Benchmarks. Around 1.0 - 1.2...

Well I gues I get what I paid for. In switzerland the MX100's where reallly really cheap. So I got them. Do I have some playroom? Optimize it around 1.5 GByte Write? There actually is no special use case for this Lab Box I will test diffrent server OS / Linux OS / etc. and create LAB Envoirments.

so I guess practice and theory does not really fitt... :) Since in theory I should get double the write compared to what I get with RAID10... and I got half :) does not really make sense to me. Since 8 drives should be faster than 4 drives... but again theory... I do not really care about...

okay, I just did some test. I killed the RAID10 array, created a new RAIDZ2 array with my 8 Crucial MX100 512GB ssds pool: Datastore state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM CAP Product /napp-it IOstat...

Okay, so I guess I leave it turned on. Can I optimize the napp-it to get more than the 1.2 - 1.4gbyte/sec I get?