Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:02:27 -0300 From: "Nenhum_de_Nos" <matheus@eternamente.info> Cc: "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: zfs, 1 gig of RAM and periodic weekly Message-ID: <977febd5710ecac8cd9ea374ca0193f4.squirrel@109.169.62.232> In-Reply-To: <B1D93647-EDA3-49EF-85F4-4FF2AA5A893D@mac.com> References: <4F4B0F83.4090600@norma.perm.ru> <B1D93647-EDA3-49EF-85F4-4FF2AA5A893D@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, February 27, 2012 15:33, Chuck Swiger wrote: > Hi-- > > On Feb 26, 2012, at 9:07 PM, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: > [ ... ] >> all with zfs and one gig of RAM. > > This isn't a sensible combination; I wouldn't try to run ZFS on anything less than 4GB... regardless of the pool size ? I was planning on making an atom board a file server for my home, and I have two options: soekris net6501 2GB RAM and intel board powered by the 330 atom (says 2GB limited as well). My plans are to use from 4 up to 8 disks, and they should be 2TB at least. As its for home use, some p2p software and mostly music listening and sometimes movie streaming. should 2GB be that bad, that I should drop it and use UFS instead ? I may run any version of FreeBSD on it, was planning on 9-STABLE or 9.1. thanks, matheus -- We will call you Cygnus, The God of balance you shall be A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?977febd5710ecac8cd9ea374ca0193f4.squirrel>