From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 20 01:14:52 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D51A92 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 01:14:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@my.gd) Received: from mail-we0-x22f.google.com (we-in-x022f.1e100.net [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22f]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0627D748 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 01:14:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f175.google.com with SMTP id x8so6225348wey.20 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:14:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=cHkBH8S89NdYsS1ucikitz+GJIrWMKro7hwnR8d7Kdo=; b=Jfddj7RMGcZYAiN17evS1EK964VJtTDolR2M34Lh7qeCB0T8a76HYO8M4JlkgtjBWv bAdmxHFzcF0YuxIX2oh3YJDkiSnb1a0r6sGkd13TiTTSj2etJrVFMDD6qB5ZUUDXIkPO zzYEDxp3wK2d+hnJ+M9fWERgLodCiTCWH8vUeALGtKWQ/RXgrPbRM2F/ynE6wcFd0M+b Wdt5s+yDOwL68CWF1xvaxLibRg6GdFYj+eQdpdDcQeVA4fs3OHxnNbS2ZnV595lNfYnN RZ7naAl+kWEZbo8ksqEqL9qGmgyK0LkR1xMWaa1yi/eoIoBqv/shHKJFS3eeTU/gDuNE Zs2g== X-Received: by 10.194.158.100 with SMTP id wt4mr30140484wjb.37.1361322890570; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:14:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.13] (did75-17-88-165-130-96.fbx.proxad.net. [88.165.130.96]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o8sm28566426wix.7.2013.02.19.17.14.47 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:14:49 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: ZFS + iSCSI architecture From: Fleuriot Damien In-Reply-To: <93B2D1C4-8887-45F9-9939-A099AC5E3DA0@todoo.biz> Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 02:14:47 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <93B2D1C4-8887-45F9-9939-A099AC5E3DA0@todoo.biz> To: "bsd@todoo.biz" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmd4jfxlPvmUT7W6aEyrjs9Y1X6TB4WuJbNsgWjZgYef9DM6kUKoBFYmG5Wjt2TeVYfQ+aF Cc: Liste FreeBSD 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: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 01:14:52 -0000 On Feb 19, 2013, at 11:20 PM, "bsd@todoo.biz" wrote: > Hello, >=20 >=20 > 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.=20 >=20 >=20 > The idea behind all that was to grant 5 or six critical servers access = to the NAS so that they can take advantage of :=20 >=20 > 1. space available on the NAS >=20 > 2. ability of the NAS to use ZFS and of clients to support this file = system (including snapshots)=20 >=20 > 3. Access the server using iSCSI (at least this is what I initially = planned).=20 >=20 > 4. Mount part of their filesystem using data stored on the SAN (like = /usr/local/ or other parts of the system).=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > The server accessing the data will be of two types :=20 >=20 > 1. 2 x Ubuntu server 10.04 LTS=20 >=20 > 2. 4 x FreeBSD (mainly 8 and 9) with jail configured=20 >=20 >=20 > I have started reading about iSCSI and potential problems with = FreeBSD.=20 >=20 What problems do you mean ? > So my main questions would be :=20 >=20 >=20 > =95 Should I go for iSCSI ?=20 >=20 Well in all use cases, iscsi should perform faster than NFS. > =95 Should I rather choose / prefer NFS ?=20 >=20 > =95 Should I export a Volume as UFS rather than ZFS (is ZFS supported = as a target) ? >=20 I'm not sure what you mean here, when you export a zvol over ISCSI: - your SAN is the target and presents a block device (the zvol) - your client is the initiator - your client attaches to the ISCSI drive and formats it using = filesystem XYZ, be it ext3, ufs or ntfs >=20 > The main idea is stability, redundancy of data and ease of maintenance = (in a headless FreeBSD / Linux world) before anything else !=20 >=20 ISCSI is a bit harder to setup IMO, however I think it''s more reliable = than NFS, what with its auto retries if it loses the network link to a = device. >=20 >=20 > That's the big pictures, if you have any pointers, advise, they are = all welcome.=20 >=20 >=20 > 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))=85=20 >=20 This is idd a very interesting topic and I hope to see more :) >=20 > Thx very much for your infos and feedback.=20