From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Tue May 17 18:00:45 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0516B3F2BB for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 18:00:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lkateley@kateley.com) Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com (mail-io0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5FFB1C1F for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 18:00:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lkateley@kateley.com) Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id i75so33759545ioa.3 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 11:00:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kateley-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=reply-to:subject:references:to:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wP2UykMcSjQT9UMzYWI3gy6Q2O3oGjERkEmxjNa9Mk8=; b=jvjoRUiURtJav+iXlTT9V8az+nURg55tF/X9oqY5+rJIRdvIUrwdBFY4c2upNluZFN TZTtIgvhXMywMoU5au4dpBLbBOFX3ucjOyg5Vh75aT4eegh8iwFCYHkGF/IG5K83vZtz dO2piTvjdvU76wixOG0qn/xe8yslZw6FXnJyVi4WF+xFXoHE41iVinGZ1oblx1/f03ag xX1vKrSwYYEYndQUvPkv6G9SYZe8vxW0dsuktWT6xVObwZOtyiamHbW8+HBi7LgZvWzc kRhCBA2dYWc/JbOTa/yZi+mcgNhF9urNcWhxsyutrZt9vNnXaUcV+kihDn88Qbd7t9NL IuOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:subject:references:to:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wP2UykMcSjQT9UMzYWI3gy6Q2O3oGjERkEmxjNa9Mk8=; b=ZgfdViujFJQcwxR+F3Jql8exIgAO+asYCggEjax1AqerwGM0l0LmgmZdQZ4zoiom7o ppWypqYnh4o4wi/JhOqmT0t/5gp2xC/ZmqmM6wIu9dV2JKBobg6mxC4JjQBJ3zMmgxVp NFMbEi+VeExbs1Up7hv0D+Nnl3NAJKHNAxfu34ILRyNS3gvM6t2X/yYLkAGyNVfx/ShA YcUDDTfO/7Wwl0mMqD07+DWcbMDynABU5p56Ph30d4dL4ZhtNsgUkbv7dU9izRuR6OAp MGSDGGxAD9KYv1AV2yBOSIpojPG1AYTmNRlduBRCI0mkMqNedIYU4IG9zipHUxGlqMvv 3WIA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWoZ7l+qZCwWdFvDrXb+/BOKz5Esq8I7ddJjDhkAZpTJwkyDyIRLa0nKB6CGLHmxA== X-Received: by 10.36.83.20 with SMTP id n20mr2175221itb.61.1463508045094; Tue, 17 May 2016 11:00:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.4] ([63.231.252.189]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id j188sm1399272ita.8.2016.05.17.11.00.43 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 17 May 2016 11:00:44 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: linda@kateley.com Subject: Re: Best practice for high availability ZFS pool References: <5E69742D-D2E0-437F-B4A9-A71508C370F9@FreeBSD.org> <5DA13472-F575-4D3D-80B7-1BE371237CE5@getsomewhere.net> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org From: Linda Kateley Organization: Kateley Company Message-ID: <573B5C4B.80406@kateley.com> Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 13:00:43 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5DA13472-F575-4D3D-80B7-1BE371237CE5@getsomewhere.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 18:00:45 -0000 On 5/17/16 11:13 AM, Joe Love wrote: >> On May 16, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Palle Girgensohn wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> We need to set up a ZFS pool with redundance. The main goal is high availability - uptime. >> >> I can see a few of paths to follow. >> >> 1. HAST + ZFS >> >> 2. Some sort of shared storage, two machines sharing a JBOD box. >> >> 3. ZFS replication (zfs snapshot + zfs send | ssh | zfs receive) >> >> 4. using something else than ZFS, even a different OS if required. >> >> My main concern with HAST+ZFS is performance. Google offer some insights here, I find mainly unsolved problems. Please share any success stories or other experiences. >> >> Shared storage still has a single point of failure, the JBOD box. Apart from that, is there even any support for the kind of storage PCI cards that support dual head for a storage box? I cannot find any. >> >> We are running with ZFS replication today, but it is just too slow for the amount of data. >> >> We prefer to keep ZFS as we already have a rather big (~30 TB) pool and also tools, scripts, backup all is using ZFS, but if there is no solution using ZFS, we're open to alternatives. Nexenta springs to mind, but I believe it is using shared storage for redundance, so it does have single points of failure? >> >> Any other suggestions? Please share your experience. :) For true high availability there is an application RSF-1 that can get full HA. I am not sure the exact failover times, but the last time I talked to them, it was very low. They also run higher up in ZFS. >> >> Palle >> > I don’t know if this falls into the realm of what you want, but BSDMag just released an issue with an article entitled “Adding ZFS to the FreeBSD dual-controller storage concept.” > https://bsdmag.org/download/reusing_openbsd/ > > My understanding in this setup is that the only single point of failure for this model is the backplanes that the drives would connect to. Most of the jbods you can buy also have the ability to have dual backplanes also > Depending on your controller cards, this could be alleviated by simply using multiple drive shelves, and only using one drive/shelf as part of a vdev (then stripe or whatnot over your vdevs). > > It might not be what you’re after, as it’s basically two systems with their own controllers, with a shared set of drives. Some expansion from the virtual world to real physical systems will probably need additional variations. > I think the TrueNAS system (with HA) is setup similar to this, only without the split between the drives being primarily handled by separate controllers, but someone with more in-depth knowledge would need to confirm/deny this. > > -Joe > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"