From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 3 00:25:33 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D60B71065719 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2009 00:25:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@ibctech.ca) Received: from ibctech.ca (v6.ibctech.ca [IPv6:2607:f118::b6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 893568FC19 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2009 00:25:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@ibctech.ca) Received: (qmail 31557 invoked by uid 89); 3 Jan 2009 00:37:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?IPv6:2607:f118::5?) (steve@ibctech.ca@2607:f118::5) by 2607:f118::b6 with ESMTPA; 3 Jan 2009 00:37:27 -0000 Message-ID: <495EB07C.9000401@ibctech.ca> Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:25:32 -0500 From: Steve Bertrand User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dick hoogendijk References: <495E17AD.30707@isafeelin.org> <20090102160727.A38841@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <867i5dsoll.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> <20090102174809.B39293@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20090102201730.GC22308@teddy.fas.com> <20090102222428.e06eddac.dick@nagual.nl> In-Reply-To: <20090102222428.e06eddac.dick@nagual.nl> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Using HDD's for ZFS: 'desktop' vs 'raid / enterprise' -edition drives? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 00:25:34 -0000 dick hoogendijk wrote: > On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 15:17:30 -0500 > stan wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 05:48:27PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >>>>> think twice before doing. >>>> Could you elaborate please ? >>> ZFS still doesn't work as described ... >> Is that comment FreeBSD specifc, or aimed at ZFS in general? > > Mind you, ZFS on FreeBSD is not the same as on OpenSolaris-2008.11, > Nevada or even Solaris 10. On those platforms ZFS generally does what it > is supposed to do, other than it's still a developing FS. > On *BSD related systems that is not always the case. Do a good readup. I had problems with ZFS about a year ago (or so). Since then, for me, ZFS has been quite reliable: amanda# zpool list NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT storage 1.82T 1.21T 623G 66% ONLINE - amanda# zpool status NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM storage ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 ad0 ONLINE 0 0 0 ad2 ONLINE 0 0 0 ad4 ONLINE 2 0 0 ad6 ONLINE 0 1 0 ...with four drives as such (I'd call them 'resi' or 'home-user' quality: ad2: 476940MB at ata1-master SATA300 This machine, which runs AMANDA backup archiver, backing up ~8 FreeBSD servers at about 120Mbps network every night is: amanda# uname -a FreeBSD amanda.x 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Thu Jul 17 15:24:40 UTC 2008 steve@x:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 I've pushed the machine to 686Mbps network @225kpps, including FBSD SCP and Windows NetBIOS clients while running iperf on other boxen and was still able to write/read to the storage. Instead of this one-liner crap 'don't do it' information to the users of this list, lets begin explaining *why* its not working, and start providing coherent solutions as to how the OP can work around the issue, huh? Steve