From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 23 22:39:52 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@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 BC9B3A2A; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sendtomatt@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pb0-f52.google.com (mail-pb0-f52.google.com [209.85.160.52]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3884C641; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id uo5so39382pbc.11 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:39:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bd3sz9qPeMWHGxqmErArzCpY3zda65LV918si2p09y4=; b=K0q2Bt7K/faC6QCw9z6UjxJ3ir4W3AGafxkmOH6FtNsF0PFr1iCWIk9GutCYlBW/Px ZxHaG05+2U38K8cyudKzL2BC2/RIO5vn3lCUq6j1NzIJHXIYgnYGqKd9WerhOHFh3aks De3QDz9E1j8ZBJ3ZhiRiRE7kJ3C7cxYjhQC14Fj+yPjaQpyyLzFmtVlGd9PucKXKqVh1 U5p/Uev3j7U11dubDJ6+NXF4ue3qkR4IUCnJCnohVyC4C/3pE/e3bCRh7mCvjcF/ObwY lPxvhG1Q5OzD2ctbum/Ts9HEW/6MEaB+TnG2QlHsvemEbzqSyDLxth3qNSqU/nmiZZh9 /4lA== X-Received: by 10.68.239.232 with SMTP id vv8mr7292677pbc.53.1358980483013; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from bakeneko.local (108-213-216-134.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [108.213.216.134]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l5sm12460471pax.10.2013.01.23.14.34.40 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:34:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51006548.7050807@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:33:44 -0800 From: matt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.11) Gecko/20121203 Thunderbird/10.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wojciech Puchar Subject: Re: ZFS regimen: scrub, scrub, scrub and scrub again. References: <20130122073641.GH30633@server.rulingia.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-fs , Artem Belevich , FreeBSD Hackers X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:52 -0000 On 01/23/13 14:27, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> > > both "works". For todays trend of solving everything by more hardware > ZFS may even have "enough" performance. > > But still it is dangerous for a reasons i explained, as well as it > promotes bad setups and layouts like making single filesystem out of > large amount of disks. This is bad for no matter what filesystem and > RAID setup you use, or even what OS. > > ZFS mirror performance is quite good (both random IO and sequential), and resilvers/scrubs are measured in an hour or less. You can always make pool out of these instead of RAIDZ if you can get away with less total available space. I think RAIDZ vs Gmirror is a bad comparison, you can use a ZFS mirror with all the ZFS features, plus N-way (not sure if gmirror does this). Regarding single large filesystems, there is an old saying about not putting all your eggs into one basket, even if it's a great basket :) Matt