From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Fri Feb 22 16:18:48 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309F414F23AA for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:18:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80F7073D5C for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:18:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [192.168.1.191] (213-216-249-17.bb.dnainternet.fi [213.216.249.17]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x1MGIjXZ054641 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:18:45 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host 213-216-249-17.bb.dnainternet.fi [213.216.249.17] claimed to be [192.168.1.191] From: Stefan Parvu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\)) Subject: Re: RBPI3B+ FreeBSD 12 ZFS Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:18:39 +0200 References: <5D976A97-9800-4A9F-A155-F3BD998AFB4C@kronometrix.org> To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 80F7073D5C X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.95 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-arm@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.85)[0.849,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mail.kronometrix.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.61)[0.610,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.82)[0.820,0]; IP_SCORE(0.48)[asn: 14061(2.48), country: US(-0.07)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:18:48 -0000 > People have run a 512MB beaglebone with zfs on sdcard. It surely wasn't > high performance, and it reported needed some hand-tuning to run at > all, but it worked. > > There's a lot of mythology about sdcards and what they can and can't > do, and how supposedly fragile they are. It's all a bunch of noise you > can safely ignore. They're slow, but they're plenty reliable. Thanks for pointers. I do agree some SD cards are robust nowadays. In fact very ok. Transcend, SanDisk we are currently using are very ok with FreeBSD 11,12 different workloads of course on low throughput. Will need to take some time and dive to ZFS RBPI. Stefan