From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 19 22:54:53 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF5BDBE for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:54:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ait.mlist@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lb0-f179.google.com (mail-lb0-f179.google.com [209.85.217.179]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DECADD7B for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:54:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id j14so5387255lbo.24 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:54:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:x-operating-system:user-agent; bh=c0qWygJOMsp9hnCegZlFVgaBe74hIfl6dh5QFzS18lw=; b=iEgRuzm7Dtq5/9gtNs2wg0LIhb3KaG0r4GhE5ksbsxB/zaIo9ZV6msEP0L7K2nh97R bD/WAgWc8vwbD0FNU60ssiJTyg3OJHUI+QLb2RvKuAciiS04D779vQaKQSV5xueKi5pz XgKNY3vufOJqmUVJUbYU65FFgph+umpWRYPeFIVlT41V7PkB4qT3sha9hCZQ/Deug/Qy waGH4x2ZvAak0Shuq9R7f92QIFwXLJGqraOZVwdXFCRzoWaWo8k2VycFwiFIl0DXrgYh BPGLW4G7n+PqECs77fE+I2zO2kxFi8S/egiSiNjXMamBiAZyMBguTx+RMDFS1i6onqAu s3zA== X-Received: by 10.152.104.18 with SMTP id ga18mr15820667lab.33.1361314491404; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:54:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from a3500l ([188.114.62.200]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pk1sm37894219lab.0.2013.02.19.14.54.48 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:54:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by a3500l (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 20 Feb 2013 02:54:47 +0400 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 02:54:47 +0400 From: Dmitry Sarkisov To: "bsd@todoo.biz" Subject: Re: ZFS + iSCSI architecture Message-ID: <20130219225447.GA11566@aperturescience.org> References: <93B2D1C4-8887-45F9-9939-A099AC5E3DA0@todoo.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <93B2D1C4-8887-45F9-9939-A099AC5E3DA0@todoo.biz> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE i386 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:54:53 -0000 On 19-02-2013, Tue [23:20:41], bsd@todoo.biz wrote: > Hello, > > > I am about to start deploying a large system (about 18 To which can grow up to 36 To) based on a big Intel platform with lot's of fancy features to have turbo boosted platform (ZIL on SSD + system on dongle if I go for FreeNAS). Since I want to move on quite fast I might decide to use FreeNAS in it's latest version. > > > The idea behind all that was to grant 5 or six critical servers access to the NAS so that they can take advantage of : > > 1. space available on the NAS > > 2. ability of the NAS to use ZFS and of clients to support this file system (including snapshots) > > 3. Access the server using iSCSI (at least this is what I initially planned). > > 4. Mount part of their filesystem using data stored on the SAN (like /usr/local/ or other parts of the system). > > > > The server accessing the data will be of two types : > > 1. 2 x Ubuntu server 10.04 LTS > > 2. 4 x FreeBSD (mainly 8 and 9) with jail configured > > > I have started reading about iSCSI and potential problems with FreeBSD. > > So my main questions would be : > > > • Should I go for iSCSI ? > > • Should I rather choose / prefer NFS ? > > • Should I export a Volume as UFS rather than ZFS (is ZFS supported as a target) ? > > > The main idea is stability, redundancy of data and ease of maintenance (in a headless FreeBSD / Linux world) before anything else ! > > > > That's the big pictures, if you have any pointers, advise, they are all welcome. > > > It is quite late where I leave, so I will reply to posts in 8 to 10 hours, but I hope to have enough answer(s) to start an interesting thread (as I think this question is very interesting and not so clearly explained (at least in my mind))… > > > Thx very much for your infos and feedback. > > Hello, If I needed a NFS+iSCSI solution I'd go for Solaris 11. Docs are abundant and the system is very stable and feature-rich. Tried recently the integration in Windows Domain and iSCSI features, all works wery good. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for FreeBSD ;) but in this particular case I'd choose Solaris. -- D.S. <-\ Powered by <-------------------o <-/ FreeBSD