From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 13 09:11:54 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8574F16A402 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:11:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5B2013C48E for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:11:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (spslgh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l1D9BkKD033953; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:11:51 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id l1D9Bkxl033952; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:11:46 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:11:46 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200702130911.l1D9Bkxl033952@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, des@des.no In-Reply-To: <86ire7gdnv.fsf@dwp.des.no> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-fs User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:11:52 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: UFS2 with SAN X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, des@des.no List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:11:54 -0000 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Eric Anderson writes: > > Well, I'm not sure what issues they had, but have had fantastic > > success with NFS and FreeBSD. FreeBSD with the right hardware and > > tweaks can make some NetApp boxes look weak. *cough* WAFL *cough* > > I'd be very surprised, considering that NetApp filers run FreeBSD. AFAIK they run a heavily modified NetBSD, but at least it's some sort of BSD. ;-) In fact I'm very satisfied with NetApp filers and their WAFL system. We have NetApp Filer clusters in production at customers, they exhibit exceptional reliability, even if a disk, a disk shelf, or an entire filer head fails, the cluster keeps running. Not to mention that it submits a support mail automatically and you get the replacement without having to do anything yourself. I'm afraid it is not possible to implement such a redundant NFS cluster with FreeBSD. Not to mention snapshots ... Years before FreeBSD intro- duced snapshots, WAFL supported them, and they work a whole lot better. Creating a snapshot takes just a few seconds, and file system access never freezes during that period. It works so well that you can create hourly snapshots for simple "undelete" usage without affecting the usability and performance of the file system at all. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart Any opinions expressed in this message are personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix GmbH & Co KG in any way. FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Python is executable pseudocode. Perl is executable line noise.