Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 10:35:37 -0700 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: John <freebsd-fs@potato.growveg.org> Cc: FreeBSD Filesystems <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: newbie zfs query - usb3 or sata? Message-ID: <CAOjFWZ4dYhoU%2BSbxYLPw5gT2iz9vqqCVu_vCPkzKuomofKJGhg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20131002170159.GA6937@potato.growveg.org> References: <20131002170159.GA6937@potato.growveg.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 10:01 AM, John <freebsd-fs@potato.growveg.org> wrote= : > Hello freebsd-fs. I have a possible newbie question, and am not sure > if this should go into -hardware: > > I have the situation where I need to add more hard drives but I haven't > got the space in the existing box. So I have two choices - make > a DAS box out of a SATA connection or make one out of a USB3 > connection (using a Highpoint usb3 card with 4 ports and 4 channels). > I'll be ZFS-ing them together on 9.2-R. > > The question is, under zfs which kind of setup will be better? > I can stick 8GB RAM into the machine. I want to get 4x 4Tb drives. > With the 4-port card, one will go into each port. Similarly > with a 4-port SATA. Performance-wise is there much in it, and > will ZFS be able to handle it. The machine is a desktop. > > The other thing I need to know is, should the machine die, can I just pul= l > the card/disks and put it into another freebsd machine, install zfs and > expect the data to still be there? =E2=80=8BIf there's an option to use SATA (even eSATA), then use it. While the theoretical performance of USB3 is good, the CPU load isn't worth it, especially if using 4 separate USB3 port. And, USB has a nasty habit of every now and then messing up a SCSI command or dropping a device off the bus, or otherwise doing "not very nice" things. --=20 Freddie Cash fjwcash@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjFWZ4dYhoU%2BSbxYLPw5gT2iz9vqqCVu_vCPkzKuomofKJGhg>