Dude, were do you work to sustain or even need such crazy I/O? Mebbe like a hosting service? I mean I didn't see a Digital Domain or ILM sig on your email :) - Brian On Oct 6, 2009, at 2:37 PM, nate wrote: > aurfalien at gmail.com wrote: >> You mind running Bonnie on your Exanet? >> >> We can compare charts, Exanet vs Bluearc, >> >> Lemme know so I can start preparing the test. > > Our system is slammed almost 24/7(our disks are sustaining > 60ms service times for writes, though front end write response > times is around 2-3ms) so I can't get accurate numbers for > you. From a blog entry of mine: > http://www.techopsguys.com/2009/08/04/123/ > > I can send you (off-list) some basic iozone numbers > I took in the early days of testing, I didn't have the > best settings at the time so a lot of is is from cache, > not from disk. I plan to add another 100 disks early next > year and re-stripe all of the data that should dramatically > improve performance. > > "better" results are probably gotten from SpecSFS numbers > at least you can get something decent to compare with > though BlueArc hasn't posted numbers with the new version > yet: > http://www.spec.org/sfs2008/results/ > > As I mentioned in another email I don't think the bottleneck > is the NAS, it's the disks. Given the load we see today I > could double the spindle count to 400 disks(SATA-II) and > still not max out a two node Exanet cluster. > > nate > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos