This article is a detailed answer to conversation about simfs vs ploop vs ZFS from OpenVZ maillist.
gzip compression on ZFS
We have enabled ZFS gzip compression and move all data to new created ZFS volume.
And we got following result:
As you can see we save about 160 GB of data. New ZFS size of this data is: 3340 GB, old size: 3500 GB.
lz4 compression on ZFS
So, ZFS developers do not recommend gzip and we will try lzr4 compression as best option.
We copy same data to new ZFS storage with lz4 compression enabled and got following results:
ZFS deduplication
As you know, ZFS has another killer feature - deduplication! And it's best option when we store so much containers with fixed number of distributions (debian, ubuntu, centos).
But please keep in mind, we have disabled compression on this step!
We have enabled deduplication for new storage and copy all production data to new storage with deduplication.
When data copy was finished we got this breath taking results:
We have saved 840 GB of data with deduplication! We are really close to save 1Tb!
For very curious readers I could offer some internal data regarding ZFS dedup:
That's why we have only single file system which ready for 21 century. And ext4 with derivative file systems should be avoided everywhere if possible.
So, will be fine if you help ZFS on Linux community with bug reporting and development!
Because I have finished very detailed tests of ZFS for VPS storage I would like to share they with my Dear Community.
Source data (real clients, real data, different OS templates, different OS templates versions, server running for ~1year, production server full copy):
Size: 5,4T
Used: 3,5T
Avail: 1,7T
Usage:69%
This data from HWN with OpenVZ with ploop.
Our internal toolkit fastvps_ploop_compacter show following details about this server:
Total wasted space due to ploop bugs: 205.1 GbWasted space means difference between real data size and ploop disks size, i.e. ploop overhead.
gzip compression on ZFS
We have enabled ZFS gzip compression and move all data to new created ZFS volume.
And we got following result:
NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT
data
8
,16T
3
,34T
4
,82T
40
%
1
.00x ONLINE -
As you can see we save about 160 GB of data. New ZFS size of this data is: 3340 GB, old size: 3500 GB.
lz4 compression on ZFS
So, ZFS developers do not recommend gzip and we will try lzr4 compression as best option.
We copy same data to new ZFS storage with lz4 compression enabled and got following results:
ALLOC: 2,72TbWow! Amazing! We save about 600 Gb of data! Really!
ZFS deduplication
As you know, ZFS has another killer feature - deduplication! And it's best option when we store so much containers with fixed number of distributions (debian, ubuntu, centos).
But please keep in mind, we have disabled compression on this step!
We have enabled deduplication for new storage and copy all production data to new storage with deduplication.
When data copy was finished we got this breath taking results:
zpool list
NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT
data
8
,16T
2
,53T
5
,62T
31
%
1
.33x ONLINE -
We have saved 840 GB of data with deduplication! We are really close to save 1Tb!
For very curious readers I could offer some internal data regarding ZFS dedup:
zdb -D dataZFS compression and deduplication simultaneously
DDT-sha256-zap-duplicate: 5100040 entries, size 581 on disk, 187 in core
DDT-sha256-zap-unique: 27983716 entries, size 518 on disk, 167 in core
dedup = 1.34, compress = 1.00, copies = 1.02, dedup * compress / copies = 1.31
So, ZFS is amazingly flexible and we could use compression and dedulication in same time and got even more storage save. And this tests is your own home task :) Please share your results here!
ConclusionSo, will be fine if you help ZFS on Linux community with bug reporting and development!
No comments :
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.