From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 26 08:42:13 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892A516A468 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:42:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tevans.uk@googlemail.com) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.238]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA71113C44C for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:42:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tevans.uk@googlemail.com) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 70so1133445wra for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:42:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer; b=BLPzM6JM0zJdjScj107DUKpYyNUj8cK22s0QOjoqrv5fzd5RvRmuMyyApMaFKLsS5CcvA1+DvqEp63FrQ6vo4DX/6KxXXDyTpK2/u4AmbCyyf8aoJWwek1ZTSZFrq0wZwpRJazQ2LmGEBPYYAIuRRwK4Yd9Zy2ev4AqGpMBFHgk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer; b=XWbtF2zuc0F/w1p90tPRVyUjFwt02f8Z8+axsNHBoZ8Fa4xdBmiZVrkX46E8TiVUb9HuKsMod58HDGQZ4kNs9I8zstaa09G+0cO2nVDgHMfU6TvwaDL7b++Yps0vbZkSnQms8sww/ySb8ycJlzaeJW5CvwQ7oMPDjfvo39rnYnw= Received: by 10.78.160.2 with SMTP id i2mr2942616hue.1182847331437; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:42:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1%696972032? ( [217.206.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f4sm5989394nfh.2007.06.26.01.42.09 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:42:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Evans To: Ollivier Robert In-Reply-To: <20070626081951.GB85270@keltia.freenix.fr> References: <20070626081951.GB85270@keltia.freenix.fr> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-5EvW2X4+UIrRiY3g8r5H" Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:42:06 +0100 Message-Id: <1182847326.1511.3.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Cc: FreeBSD Current Users' list Subject: Re: Is this reasonable ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:42:13 -0000 --=-5EvW2X4+UIrRiY3g8r5H Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 10:19 +0200, Ollivier Robert wrote: > Hello, >=20 > My current mail/uucp/web/router/firewall machine is a D820-based machinie > (dual core pentium at 2.8 GHz) with two gmirror-ed 160 GB SATA drives > running a somewhat oldish 6.1-STABLE. It has only 512 MB of memory and > perform rather well. >=20 > With all the very nice point of ZFS, would it be reasonable to run > 7.0/amd64 on it? The point being moving to amd64 as ZFS is more optimize= d > for this arhitecture. Should I try to get more memory for it (it is a De= ll > 9150 machine)? or could it run as is? iirc the Intel D820 isn't 64bit capable, so it would be unreasonable to run 7.0/amd64 on it ;) ZFS likes amd64 and it likes RAM. If you want it to do more than just be a ZFS box (like web/mail/uucp ;) I'd suggest at least 1GB RAM, and ideally swap the processor for something with EMT64. Cheers Tom --=-5EvW2X4+UIrRiY3g8r5H Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBGgNFZlcRvFfyds/cRAoBfAJ9elpeCYylMBAABHzZ+zDkgE/TnXACgmAP/ BhSrjebtgngyIUJ1P3ADAoA= =j0PV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-5EvW2X4+UIrRiY3g8r5H--