From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 23 02:53:39 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B983CAB for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 02:53:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com (mail-qa0-f47.google.com [209.85.216.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10B8523B9 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 02:53:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id i13so631848qae.34 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:53:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=GryQtAHXsQtk1jt/81zpySA51Ir4YMeJdYqFEcmLBho=; b=kMAOqpdNqTopS6MrMcQ/JTuynxO2A5kxXZ8rpAPL1K2CDdmwfh/SN+4X8IlGyZ+46O nG2np7HkDvAXCsyzJNXMVZXv3w+2zj/SP7VdGHDq12yR1ZOw1/HYXHWhZhmIN+vHSS2Z dogjCUFubV6uFtIStcmvJpsIuKWcc/mGLNxNr/ZZ6FR9BHhS9HF6ohUCbcKFk3ouyLhu FP36WSxFbaYJSOkjlRAu9r7FQbRVVaD+j3+u/DC+MZa6j+jTFbL5rpOsbD+pS343fuA6 /0FHYUdlNJfCc5vlGn7/uW1iNi5hSTWP2x7LMnwQqtHqa99WEXXoePTSHbA9MlhcqBom rxig== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmY1ihJwnSS/bSxK2zGMShl4Yh9eNipCB8isfLUZJ0JGpUay8dmsmX9IktH1GDSso5v1DNw X-Received: by 10.140.92.13 with SMTP id a13mr23882678qge.88.1406084010916; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.65] ([96.236.21.80]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w15sm1707693qay.34.2014.07.22.19.53.29 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: deciding UFS vs ZFS From: Paul Kraus In-Reply-To: <20140722133305.228a1690@gumby.homeunix.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 22:53:28 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <483CBF75-1553-4A0D-916B-1B3F1B9B7CBA@kraus-haus.org> References: <20140713190308.GA9678@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <20140714071443.42f615c5@X220.alogt.com> <53C326EE.1030405@my.hennepintech.edu> <20140714111221.5d4aaea9@X220.alogt.com> <20140715143821.23638db5@gumby.homeunix.com> <20140716143929.74209529@gumby.homeunix.com> <20140718180416.715cdc0b@gumby.homeunix.com> <20140722133305.228a1690@gumby.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 02:53:39 -0000 On Jul 22, 2014, at 8:33, RW wrote: > Would you rather lose a third of your books, or a third of the > chapters from all your books?=20 If you are storing data you do not want to lose on non-redundant = storage, well, then you deserve what you get. Whether it is UFS or ZFS. What I really do not understand is this mindset that using ZFS (on a = single drive) is an all-or-nothing proposition in terms of failures. = What kind of failure with a partitioned drive and UFS will yield *less* = data loss than ZFS? Bad disk blocks? ZFS sees the bad checksum and lets = you know. What does FreeBSD UFS do with bad blocks (or silently corrupt = blocks)? On the other hand, having to guess up front how much space will be = needed in each of the various (manually managed) partitions is a = crap-shoot. More often than not leaving lots of unused space that = *other* partitions could really make good use of. That is, in my = opinion, the biggest management advantage of ZFS on a single drive=85 = pooled storage with the ability to control it (quotas and reservations). But I have only ever run ZFS on a single drive for testing purposes. All = of my real data is on redundant storage. I rsync the data directories on = my laptop with my server at home on a regular basis (and even use Time = Machine, yes the laptop is a Mac) at the office, so I have THREE copies = of the important data (one of which is redundant). The cost of storage = and low end servers is much, much less than the cost of lost data. -- Paul Kraus paul@kraus-haus.org