From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 17 22:24:48 2012 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 86EE5106566C for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:24:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C7C8FC13 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:24:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0HMCXPn003894; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:12:37 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id q0HMCPa2003891; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:12:29 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:12:25 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Devin Teske In-Reply-To: <03a501ccd562$5b2f4e80$118deb80$@fisglobal.com> Message-ID: References: <885A2A83-A6FF-4E03-AB67-09BE0D2E557E@todoo.biz> <03a501ccd562$5b2f4e80$118deb80$@fisglobal.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:12:43 +0100 (CET) Cc: 'Liste FreeBSD' Subject: RE: Backup strategy for zfs + jail 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: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:24:48 -0000 >> --> Efficiency >> --> Compatibility with ZFS >> >> > > If you're running 9, give HAST a shot. maybe a stupid question but what is a practical difference between hast and doing ggate+gmirror and setting "prefer" load balancing to local disk?