firesyde424
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2019
- Messages
- 155
Initial testing with FIO yielded just over 11GB/sec and 100K IO with randrw, which meets our goal but seems a little low.
Knowing the parameters would be useful to understand those numbers.Initial testing with FIO yielded just over 11GB/sec and 100K IO with randrw, which meets our goal but seems a little low.
How could I tell that?Are you sure your are not leveraging ARC?
reboot each time you start a new fio (unless you have edited the standard behaviour this will clear the arc every time) or monitor the arc (ie withHow could I tell that?
arc_summary
or by the graphs in the UI).Good call. Immediately after a reboot, same command:reboot each time you start a new fio (unless you have edited the standard behaviour this will clear the arc every time) or monitor the arc (ie witharc_summary
or by the graphs in the UI).
In addition to my prior response, I've run into some more problems. The two biggest are that TrueNAS Core will only detect 16 of the 24 NVME drives, and the drives that are detected are not hot-swappable. Either of those issues are deal breakers. My assumption is that it must be an Intel vs AMD support issue as we do not see either problem on our Intel based NVME servers.Why are you assuming this? CORE should work just as fine with EPYC—and not waste 50% of the available RAM for ARC.
Not sure what the deal was, but it was repeatable. I tried a few different versions of TrueNAS core and the behavior was the same each time.Honestly that's strange behaviour, afaik FreeBSD doesn't have any issues with EPYC CPUs and should work out of the box.
Might be worth opening a bug report then if you have the time.Not sure what the deal was, but it was repeatable. I tried a few different versions of TrueNAS core and the behavior was the same each time.