From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 7 16:49:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 395CA1065670 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 16:49:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tonix@interazioni.it) Received: from mx02.interazioni.net (mx02.interazioni.net [80.94.114.204]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A49E38FC16 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 16:49:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tonix@interazioni.it) Received: (qmail 73145 invoked by uid 88); 7 Jul 2009 16:49:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.56.198?) (tonix@interazioni.it@85.18.206.139) by relay.interazioni.net with ESMTPA; 7 Jul 2009 16:49:47 -0000 Message-ID: <4A537CAC.7090608@interazioni.it> Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:49:48 +0200 From: "Tonix (Antonio Nati)" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org References: <4A5209CA.4030304@interazioni.it> <4A5376D8.5080402@interazioni.it> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: ZFS in productions 64 bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:49:49 -0000 Freddie Cash ha scritto: > On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Tonix (Antonio Nati) > wrote: > > >> Freddie Cash ha scritto: >> >> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 7:27 AM, Tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: >> >> >> >> Is anyone using in heavy production environment a ZFS FS with AMD 64 bit? >> >> >> >> We're using FreeBSD 7.2 on our backup servers. The primary backup server >> does remote backups for over 105 servers, every night. And then pushes the >> changes to the secondary backup server, every day. >> >> >> >> >> Are you using ZFS only on backup servers, or also on remote servers to make >> a snaphost of data to be backed up? >> >> > > Only on the backup servers. The remote servers are running either Debian > Linux 4.0, FreeBSD 6.x/7.x, or RHEL 4.x. And we do a couple of manual > backups of Windows XP stations using rsync for Windows. > I'm evaluating whether to use ZFS for main NFS storage I will provide to all front-end servers. Possibility to snapshost partitions, to extend/decrease them is something I'd love to do, but I'm wondering on reliability on long term. I see main concerns are about 32bit servers, while 64bits servers looks to be more 'protected', but I'm not really sure about. Better to wait for FBSD 8.0? Thanks for any advice. Tonino -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Inter@zioni Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it tonix@interazioni.it ------------------------------------------------------------