From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 21 19:08:45 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19CD6372 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 19:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ultra-secure.de (mail.ultra-secure.de [88.198.178.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74FECA6F for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2015 19:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 41394 invoked by uid 89); 21 Feb 2015 19:08:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.200?) (rainer@ultra-secure.de@217.71.83.52) by mail.ultra-secure.de with ESMTPA; 21 Feb 2015 19:08:41 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) Subject: Re: The magic of ZFS and NFS (2nd try) From: Rainer Duffner In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 20:08:38 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4257601.p3oiXZFr4n@falbala.rz1.convenimus.net> <12103095.viZFqgegqA@falbala.rz1.convenimus.net> To: Jordan Hubbard X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Christian Baer X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 19:08:45 -0000 > Am 21.02.2015 um 19:23 schrieb Jordan Hubbard : >=20 >=20 >> On Feb 21, 2015, at 9:36 AM, Christian Baer = wrote: >>=20 >> But why shouldn't I use /etc/exports? I have read people writing this = (don't=20 >> use /etc/exports) in forums when searching for answers, however the = current=20 >> manpage for zfs says this: >=20 > FreeNAS has more experience with sharing things from ZFS than anyone = else in the BSD community (that=E2=80=99s not hyperbole, it=E2=80=99s = simply fact). We don=E2=80=99t use any of the zfs sharing flags. Those = were intended more for Solaris (sharesmb, for example - FreeBSD lets you = do that, but what does it *mean* when you don=E2=80=99t have a native = CIFS service?). FreeBSD has never integrated ZFS=E2=80=99s notion of = sharing or, for that matter, a number of other things like drive hot = sparing and automatic replacement, and you=E2=80=99re seeing the results = of ZFS=E2=80=99s solaris roots still not lining up 100% with their new = FreeBSD home. That=E2=80=99s all. >=20 > I would simplify things, just as FreeNAS has (for good reasons), and = simply have ZFS be =E2=80=9Ca filesystem=E2=80=9D from FreeBSD=E2=80=99s = perspective and share it just as you would UFS. Interesting. I admit I don=E2=80=99t use NFS v4. Is it much faster than NFS v3 these days? But I=E2=80=99ve always added the line from exports(5) into the sharenfs = property like zfs get sharenfs datapool/nfs/ds3-documents NAME PROPERTY VALUE = SOURCE datapool/nfs/ds3-documents sharenfs -maproot=3D1003 -network = 10.10.10.0 -mask 255.255.255.0 inherited from datapool/nfs These lines get written into /etc/zfs/exports I like it that way because if a filesystem is destroyed, I don=E2=80=99t = have to remember removing it from /etc/exports. I also admit I=E2=80=99m heavily influenced by Solaris on this = particular setting=E2=80=A6