Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:46:25 -0700 From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> To: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@pinyon.org> Cc: "freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org" <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: UFS vs. ZFS inside bhyve hosted on ZFS Message-ID: <56ECCB91.9080503@redbarn.org> In-Reply-To: <56ECAFEB.8060305@pinyon.org> References: <56ECAFEB.8060305@pinyon.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Russell L. Carter wrote: > ... > So I am wondering if UFS in the -current guest might be better > overall. I can certainly do a multiple hour experiment, installing > a new guest with UFS root, but since I am new to this, perhaps there is > conventional wisdom about ZFS vs. UFS in the guest? Maybe UFS in the > guest requires less cpu resources from the host? Or not? i think you should do that experiment and share your results here. my similar experiment did not involve bhyve. i make a zvol and put a ufs inside, and mounted that. for writing, it was so much faster than raw zfs, that i wondered if i should start migrating other things to it. as two examples, postgres servers and MH "Mail" directories go really really fast in ufs-on-zvol compared to zfs. all my bhyve's are ufs, and their system disks are host zvols, not host zfs files made with "truncate". i admit that this was superstition on my part, but it's served me very well. one of my guests even expanded his bhyve file systems using geom and tunefs, after i made his zvol bigger. so, there's not much downside that i've seen. -- P Vixie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56ECCB91.9080503>