From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 16 08:28:00 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A439A7AE for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 08:28:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yh0-x235.google.com (mail-yh0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 677F92CBB for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 08:28:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f53.google.com with SMTP id c41so286197yho.40 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 01:27:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=F2zwkrhHsiYxXog3gY4YlDFYS+ckYv0i6uGGTv4/FAg=; b=am1ilHyuQUfPSgap2ZOvyz0Yu2764Gi+KMsFFe8kQwZaSfjm8W9aDIWEEE8YVYDP1w 8ssp24sovI9LN28Qw20tVgOoOTbcrAJyv9QXdK2TffAqi2qcIQXFWomXSs1xN0G5yspN xRm7HckPerj869x/Qd7vMUNLwr4iet72uy4RDCRrAS1poyQfeiTeRcrTEzKDU2moT1fe PJNZZEKMyTW+Mdf0UdzfD8m8CoKCPY3dg3Mvc2xtftPbzeseHvq30hVjeYNQqrNNjPWp rgk5Vlwu9T4YgUluLPiGsvXQr76ldo26nRtTfEfr3aiWV1pbMeb6SpDPGINwynFP+fBC eFHQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.74.101 with SMTP id w65mr49774643yhd.103.1405499279470; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 01:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.132.80 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 01:27:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140715143821.23638db5@gumby.homeunix.com> References: <20140713190308.GA9678@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <20140714071443.42f615c5@X220.alogt.com> <53C326EE.1030405@my.hennepintech.edu> <20140714111221.5d4aaea9@X220.alogt.com> <20140715143821.23638db5@gumby.homeunix.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 09:27:59 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: deciding UFS vs ZFS From: krad To: RW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18 Cc: FreeBSD Questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 08:28:00 -0000 UFS with SU+J surely, gjournal is now depreciated in 9.x onwards Its your choice of course, but the spreading around argument doesn't hold water as all file systems will do that over time, and what you are implying is you will only ever use a small % of the drive. Checksuming is never useful until is saves your ass, pretty much like house insurance. You don't needs it and it hurts you to have pay it, but all of a sudden when you do need it, you are very grateful you did have it. Plus you will get early warning on drive failures, rather than just failures (assuming you did copies >1, on a one drive system). zfs will happily rocket along with 16gb if its a desktop system On 15 July 2014 14:38, RW wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 11:12:21 +0800 > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:40:14 -0500 > > Andrew Berg wrote: > > > > > On 2014.07.13 18:14, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > use UFS as long as you are working with a single disk and ZFS the > > > > moment you have more than one disk. > > > Checksumming and the COW features make ZFS quite attractive for > > > single-device pools as well. > > > > there are also other features which could make ZFS attractive for > > single disk systems. But moving to a second disk only makes ZFS not > > just attractive but basically a must. > > On a desktop, without raid, I would expect ZFS to make things a lot > worse in the case of a disk failure because it would spread the damage > around all the directories. > > For that reason I'm putting my desktop user data on ufs/gjournal, but I > was wondering about putting the OS on ZFS. I don't think I'd get much > benefit from Checksumming, COW, compression etc, but I was wondering > whether ARC does a significantly better job of caching to justify ZFS's > overheads; I have 16GB of RAM. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >