From owner-freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org  Wed Nov 16 15:49:20 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 273E4C43FB5
 for <freebsd-emulation@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:49:20 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz)
Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF4611B3E
 for <freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:49:19 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz)
Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E70C928474;
 Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:49:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-86-49-16-209.net.upcbroadband.cz
 [86.49.16.209])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30F1B28426;
 Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:49:09 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: bhyve: zvols for guest disk - yes or no?
To: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de>, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org
References: <D991D88D-1327-4580-B6E5-2D59338147C0@punkt.de>
From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>
Message-ID: <582C7FF4.5030102@quip.cz>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:49:08 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D991D88D-1327-4580-B6E5-2D59338147C0@punkt.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems
 <freebsd-emulation.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-emulation>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-emulation/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:49:20 -0000

Patrick M. Hausen wrote on 2016/11/16 15:47:

[...]

> Another thing I'm pondering is: wouldn't it be better to
> run on UFS so you can dedicate as much memory
> as possible to VMs?

If you have machine with "small memory" and can't expand it (e.g. Xeon 
E3 older then v5 can take 32GB max) then you are better to use UFS. But 
if you have machine which can use more memory it is better to buy some 
additional memory modules and use all features of ZFS (replication, 
snapshots, zvols or quotas etc.)

So it depends on your workload and HW possibilities.

And as always - the best way is to do you own benchmarks for your 
workload. I did it in the past with UFS / ZFS under VirtualBox machines 
and figured out that SSD as ZIL / L2ARC is almost useless for our setup.

Miroslav Lachman