From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 2 18:03:46 2008 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 D6E061065670 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 18:03:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33DCC8FC13 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 18:03:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mB2I3XId016088; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:03:33 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id mB2I3Wjj016085; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:03:32 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:03:32 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar To: "Don O'Neil" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20081202190301.H16084@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best Journaling File System - ZFS/??? 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, 02 Dec 2008 18:03:46 -0000 > With all the discussions of ZFS lately, I'm beginning to wonder if it's > really ready for a production environment. Concerns over memory utilization, no > speed, stability, etc... > > So, my question is this... If you were building a brand new 6.3/7.0 server > with decent performance (dual core, 32 Bit OS - because of known > compatibility issues with specific software, 4 GB RAM, etc...) what file > system would you choose? What options are out there besides UFS and ZFS? i use UFS everywhere. it's ACTUALLY high performance, just lacking ZFS fancy features.