Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:09:52 -0500 From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> To: Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Best file system for a busy webserver Message-ID: <CA%2BtpaK3xW_W-GD=2XSLyHxqNNkfUyQo3Nzt1LRb_jdgbNAtakg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <47AFB706686083E99B3A3F3E@localhost> References: <47AFB706686083E99B3A3F3E@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com>wrote: > Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy > webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably better > than any other? > > Just curious. I'm getting ready to setup a new box running FreeBSD 9, and > since I'm starting from scratch, I'm questioning all my previous > assumptions. > Sounds like you have ample hardware, so I would probably consider ZFS. You get a lot of other options with it which simply aren't available or harder to manage on a UFS system. Things like data integrity, ZIL/ARC, live low-cost snapshots, diff'ing the snapshot, transparent compression, etc all come with ZFS. Great tools for certain scenarios. Properly setup, ZFS RAID functionality will own any hardware raid solution ever presented because ZFS doesn't rely on a battery for consistency, nor do they provide most other features stated including integrity oriented ones. ZFS is intended to work with raw disk/JBOD. Good controllers are still important, they simply don't have the knowledge to use them at peak efficiency. I don't see much benefit to SSD's for this use case. All the common files should be in the fs cache which is at least an order of magnitude faster than flash based memory, and finding enterprise SSD's(preferably SLC) which obey FLUSH commands appropriately and have a capicitor appropriate to production use is something more of a crapshoot than traditional SATA/SAS drives. All that being said, UFS is fine too. I use it most often for light VM installs and where resources are scarce. However the 2 single biggest ZFS feature I like are the data integrity and transparent compression are wonderful which aren't available in UFS. ZFS snapshots are much more functional as well and go well w/ zfs send/receive. -- Adam Vande More
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BtpaK3xW_W-GD=2XSLyHxqNNkfUyQo3Nzt1LRb_jdgbNAtakg>