From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 27 17:25:19 2013 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 ESMTP id 51459D23 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 17:25:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cpghost@cordula.ws) Received: from mail-pb0-f42.google.com (mail-pb0-f42.google.com [209.85.160.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A55121FE for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 17:25:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f42.google.com with SMTP id jt11so5492558pbb.29 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:25:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=iKOBBoM3LSzEHh7121UujIz9o0vR3VpWu2HC7ESuupQ=; b=l1dHiZuVGhQagGE3xKBCY3HA1uUDqA8QGVg267yqzYKKcWNf7Jx7kjs275PVTi9nbM Wk2We0bYv0/VAqXolRk5qNr5Q9vvGlJfim06bg5krp4gc7Chy45ESAjZ4P3WtEDZL3AV 24S3yGUTNkx8mi9rKyokiO+34owCOrBeEZIdV36fqWbHkcdDS4e0Oh8nQo0o4mhT7CO4 0s62hog8hmmkfcERB6hutM6wPQpRPK4HGxwJWUjL4uZaUdAP7zYl5D44Qdc6UlZYTQgA /Dw9BMx8MUJ7vYUem03N81/fklK9WXJzTZSjicQL8Kjfbm0zDGhGt7ffuYPwv4vUFZdn SrMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlCEi10VPM1sh+f5BVn4jWOcuxU5pxk4yTfb8RVgwOmfx6Y5dxunJpgOhYzGEndSzzrgvID MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.67.22.38 with SMTP id hp6mr21389519pad.53.1382894718324; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.152.3 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:25:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [93.221.175.252] In-Reply-To: <44326394-E318-41B2-B85D-EA17E50B9230@gmail.com> References: <44326394-E318-41B2-B85D-EA17E50B9230@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 18:25:18 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeNAS vs. FreeBSD? From: "C. P. Ghost" To: aurfalien Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 17:25:19 -0000 On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:13 PM, aurfalien wrote: > I've tested with and w/o swap on a ZFS data set and have seen no > degradation in ZFS performance. > That's interesting. Are you using a box with AES-NI instructions or just plain ZFS (without encryption)? That's one of the reasons I'm still undecided. With FreeBSD, I could set up swap on a dedicated slice/mirror without going through ZFS/GELI; which is important on older CPUs that don't have AES-NI instructions. I'm quite afraid of the performance hit if swap is on ZFS/GELI. Any changes made can be backed up to a file and restored on a fresh install > etc... which is simply either the ability to resort to defaults and reboot > or a fresh USB key. > That's a very useful feature indeed. I just booted a server with a USB key containing the FreeNAS image, and it works like a charm. Maybe something similar would be possible with plain vanilla FreeBSD; will have to investigate. > So its more then just a GUI. > Indeed. > However they do not have a well defined or a defined for that matter, > roadmap. > Yup, that's the other concern I have with FreeNAS. The most important question would be: would FreeNAS ZFS/GELI volumes be importable into a regular FreeBSD system, should I decide to switch back to FreeBSD (e.g. if FreeNAS ceases to be supported/updated sometimes)? I suppose yes, provided the keys are properly backed up, but without testing, I wouldn't bet the farm on it. Thanks, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/