From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 2 08:25:30 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8941065676 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 08:25:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6BA8FC21 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 08:25:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.codelab.cz [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF57019E043; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:25:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (r5bb235.net.upc.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7403E19E046; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:25:24 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A9E2BF6.6080803@quip.cz> Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:25:26 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: cz, cs, en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Stapper References: <061541E3-F301-46C4-8ECB-5B05854F0EAA@exscape.org> <4A9D558A.9070609@quip.cz> <4A9E1CB5.6030906@mapper.nl> In-Reply-To: <4A9E1CB5.6030906@mapper.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Maciej Jan Broniarz , Thomas Backman Subject: Re: zfs on gmirror slice X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:25:30 -0000 Mark Stapper wrote: > Miroslav Lachman wrote: [...] >>Yes, I am using it this way: >> >>root@cage ~/# gmirror status >> Name Status Components >>mirror/gms1 COMPLETE ad4s1 >> ad6s1 >> >> >>root@cage ~/# zpool status >> pool: tank >> state: ONLINE >> scrub: none requested >>config: >> >> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >> tank ONLINE 0 0 0 >> mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 >> ad4s2 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> ad6s2 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> >>errors: No known data errors >> >> >>root@cage ~/# zpool list >>NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT >>tank 444G 353G 91.2G 79% ONLINE - >> >> >>gmirror gms1 is for system files, ports etc. zpool (444GB) is for jails >> >>Miroslav Lachman >>_______________________________________________ > > Hello, > > I'm quite surprised by your setup, as you are using two mechanisms to > accomplish the exact same thing: data replication. > If you want two slices of toast do you use a toaster for one, and an > oven for the other? > My advice to you: either use zfs or gmirror to realize redundancy. > Of course, zfs provides far more flexibility then UFS. However, as > mentioned, booting from ZFS isn't something sysinstall can setup for you. > Besides, updating a zfs filesystem which you are running from is next to > impossible. And since ZFS is still under heavy development, you will > want to update your zfs version every now and then. > So, i would recommend setting up gmirror to mirror your whole disks, > install the base system(boot and "world") on a small UFS slice, and use > the rest of the disc as zfs slice. The reason is simple - the machine was installed one year ago, when ZFS was more experimental and sometimes with unexpected results and kernel panics. It was safer to use UFS for base. And the reason for using gmirror for base (small slice) and not for whole drive is re-synchronization after panic. Sync of 500GB drives in gmirror takes about 2 hours or more if system is under load. Sync of ZFS mirror takes seconds - only few files are synchronized, not whole mirror. ZFS mirror is better to avoid "silent data corruption" on mirrored drives. And because the setup with gmirror of one slice and ZFS mirror for second slice works without problem, I see no reason to do any changes on this machine. > If you feel comfortable enough running your entire system on zfs, you > could use a mirrored zpool to boot from. Takes a little more efford, but > is more uniform. > Updating zfs will be a pain though. You would have to boot from another > filesystem to be able to update your root filesystem. > If you'll be reinstalling your system, you might want to check out > FreeBSD 8 because zfs boot support is better. > Hope it helps. > Greetz, > Mark I am able to install and run system from ZFS only, but I have no such strong feeling to do it. I am using 2GB USB flashdisk with UFS to boot and run a system, then 4x 1TB drives in RAIDZ used as storage pool on backup server. And again - ZFS is still experimental and this setup is better for me in case when I need to do some recovery or ZFS upgrade. All can be done remotelly without a need to boot some LiveCD etc. It is my € 0.02, YMMV. Miroslav Lachman