From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Sep 9 15:53:52 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@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 63B769CC0C4 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2015 15:53:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@kraus-haus.org) Received: from mail-qk0-f170.google.com (mail-qk0-f170.google.com [209.85.220.170]) (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 2769D15C5 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2015 15:53:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@kraus-haus.org) Received: by qkdw123 with SMTP id w123so6326215qkd.0 for ; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 08:53:45 -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=5jC+lZPjXd86I+C22SnYsi9aSCk9Axz+IlYBa1wJgIU=; b=Ps3uLPVn0x4v1y6iYs1nuX0rwsNZM++XIWso9yMs3WIjR761VkXbK+SUkWZSw+BU3P 1zExu/YODo+bTQSRQVBUaEijOkFWuDL+bRs6beItY5YdlznwwCw1A7Bk2PELFW9EVNLu IjwnKqiVqYFlvsZtvAP68WuziRZhfJpZUoJs1ge9FzmR9ILKlKl76/fiPwomDTRBcpTo RIAMDDkJzVrlhKvcyjvD7JqdkCDem0/3qnSOSK8fZQWCGA4my6CiS686vrz0A2uNbYs7 4XQvLH50AzdFJXOrV68qdoY3GA0VeEsyDbTBs0gS8ySp2mI4OA9SCkwOxP2Fec2Uqmtx vsVg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmi1J494T5ePA/XA6ezUiQ7o+oA2YNXOko/bpwb69DFF617tc++JdGDaIs7R9XQcCEsxch7 X-Received: by 10.55.192.26 with SMTP id o26mr44267507qki.89.1441812566744; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 08:29:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.24.4.228] (rrcs-24-39-108-194.nyc.biz.rr.com. [24.39.108.194]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i199sm4046787qhc.44.2015.09.09.08.29.24 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 09 Sep 2015 08:29:24 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: Storage question From: Paul Kraus In-Reply-To: <55EFC2DA.3020101@hiwaay.net> Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 11:29:22 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5EB5C2C2-575B-40BD-BF6A-85F396C058FE@kraus-haus.org> References: <55EF3D23.5060009@hiwaay.net> <20150908220639.20412cbd@gumby.homeunix.com> <55EF5409.8020007@yahoo.com> <55EFC2DA.3020101@hiwaay.net> To: FreeBSD Questions X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 15:53:52 -0000 On Sep 9, 2015, at 1:24, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: > On 09/08/15 16:39, Paul Pathiakis via freebsd-questions wrote: >> Just curious, why not ZFS? It is extremely stable and then you don't = have to worry about properly sizing but you can limit the size of a = parition from growing out of control. Due to the pooling, you have = access to all your storage on the drive to all the partitions. >=20 > Good question. 1 of the new boxen (the one that is tight for storage) = is tight for CPU, quad-core AMD A4-5000, 1.5 GHz, not much firepower, & = will be tasked w/ MythTV by default, so I guessed that adding ZFS might = overpower it. I otherwise agree w/ the advantages of ZFS. Unless you turn on compression (and I would NOT on a MythTV box), ZFS is = generally not CPU bound but more constrained by RAM. I have been running = all ZFS systems on N40 and N54 CPUs (HP Micro Proliant servers) which = are dual core 1.0 and 1.3 GHz and getting reasonable speed. I can = sustain about 60 MB/sec writes via Samba with compression on. I have 8 = GB in one and 16 GB in the other. -- Paul Kraus paul@kraus-haus.org