Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 18:47:57 -0400 From: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org> To: DTD <support@safeport.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: zfs newbie Message-ID: <74C54511-0F86-46D3-A358-8981C7E21AF6@langille.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.2109141838150.65923@bucksport.safeport.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.2109071736520.87853@bucksport.safeport.com> <2b3bd0c8-204d-2f9b-2d63-cca853f5893c@langille.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.2109141838150.65923@bucksport.safeport.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=E2=80=94=20 Dan Langille http://langille <http://langille/>.org/ > On Sep 14, 2021, at 6:42 PM, DTD <support@safeport.com> wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Dan Langille wrote: >=20 >> DTD wrote on 9/7/21 5:51 PM: >>> Following the default 12.2 zfs install I got one pool (zroot) and a = dataset for each of the traditional mount points. So zfs list shows: >>> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT >>> zroot 279G 6.75T 88K /zroot >>> zroot/ROOT 1.74G 6.75T 88K none >>> zroot/ROOT/default 1.74G 6.75T 1.74G / >>> zroot/tmp 176K 6.75T 176K /tmp >>> zroot/usr 277G 6.75T 88K /usr >>> zroot/usr/home 276G 6.75T 276G /usr/home >>> zroot/usr/ports 88K 6.75T 88K /usr/ports >>> zroot/usr/src 670M 6.75T 670M /usr/src >>> zroot/var 47.5M 6.75T 88K /var >>> zroot/var/audit 88K 6.75T 88K /var/audit >>> zroot/var/crash 88K 6.75T 88K /var/crash >>> zroot/var/log 820K 6.75T 820K /var/log >>> zroot/var/mail 46.3M 6.75T 46.3M /var/mail >>> zroot/var/tmp 88K 6.75T 88K /var/tmp >>> I had consultant configure another service for us. He set up the = disk array with one dataset. so zfs list on this system give: >>> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT >>> zroot 2.65G 13.2T 2.62G legacy >>> =46rom a sysadmin view I rather like the multiple datasets. Are = there advantages to one over the other? >>=20 >> I see no advantages to me in the single dataset. >>=20 >> What do you see from zpool status? I'm wondering if this is not = directly on hardware, such as a VM under VMware. >>=20 > Nop, no VM. I have three system that I did a take all options zfs = install on. I do not remember which one I posted so here is a matching = set: >=20 >> freebsd-version > 12.1-RELEASE-p8 >=20 >> zfs list > NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT > zroot 90.6G 801G 88K /zroot > zroot/ROOT 89.9G 801G 88K none > zroot/ROOT/default 89.9G 801G 89.9G / > zroot/tmp 156K 801G 156K /tmp > zroot/usr 723M 801G 88K /usr > zroot/usr/home 18.7M 801G 18.7M /usr/home > zroot/usr/ports 88K 801G 88K /usr/ports > zroot/usr/src 704M 801G 704M /usr/src > zroot/var 21.7M 801G 88K /var > zroot/var/audit 88K 801G 88K /var/audit > zroot/var/crash 88K 801G 88K /var/crash > zroot/var/log 21.3M 801G 21.3M /var/log > zroot/var/mail 88K 801G 88K /var/mail > zroot/var/tmp 88K 801G 88K /var/tmp >=20 >> zpool status > pool: zroot > state: ONLINE > scan: none requested > config: >=20 > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > zroot ONLINE 0 0 0 > mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > ada0p3 ONLINE 0 0 0 > ada1p3 ONLINE 0 0 0 >=20 > errors: No known data errors So two drives and all in one filesystem. That's very odd. I have no idea why anyone would do that. You loose = more than a few feature doing it that way. Boot environments for one.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?74C54511-0F86-46D3-A358-8981C7E21AF6>