ZFS. It can use up as much RAM as you care to give it for caching. So if you are slinging a lot of data back and forth, more RAM is better. Especially if you are using HDDs instead of SSDs.
And bumping up the RAM for caching makes a HUGE difference in performance on a RAM starved system. Going from 16 to 32 gigs almost doubled my read write performance for anything other than tiny files here and there. And overall I/O latency tanked.
It’s a function of ZFS itself. Data that is to be written to the drives is first written to RAM, then transferred to the drives. One of the benefits of this is that if you are moving a file that is smaller than the available RAM, your transfer won’t appear to be limited to the write speed of the drives.
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
ZFS. It can use up as much RAM as you care to give it for caching. So if you are slinging a lot of data back and forth, more RAM is better. Especially if you are using HDDs instead of SSDs.
fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 7 months ago
And bumping up the RAM for caching makes a HUGE difference in performance on a RAM starved system. Going from 16 to 32 gigs almost doubled my read write performance for anything other than tiny files here and there. And overall I/O latency tanked.
summerof69@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Why do you need to cache data? To seed a lot of torrents?
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
It’s a function of ZFS itself. Data that is to be written to the drives is first written to RAM, then transferred to the drives. One of the benefits of this is that if you are moving a file that is smaller than the available RAM, your transfer won’t appear to be limited to the write speed of the drives.