Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 21:31:32 +0200 From: Julien Cigar <julien@perdition.city> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@ixsystems.com> Cc: Ben RUBSON <ben.rubson@gmail.com>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HAST + ZFS + NFS + CARP Message-ID: <20160704193131.GJ41276@mordor.lan> In-Reply-To: <AE372BF0-02BE-4BF3-9073-A05DB4E7FE34@ixsystems.com> References: <678321AB-A9F7-4890-A8C7-E20DFDC69137@gmail.com> <20160630185701.GD5695@mordor.lan> <6035AB85-8E62-4F0A-9FA8-125B31A7A387@gmail.com> <20160703192945.GE41276@mordor.lan> <20160703214723.GF41276@mordor.lan> <65906F84-CFFC-40E9-8236-56AFB6BE2DE1@ixsystems.com> <B48FB28E-30FA-477F-810E-DF4F575F5063@gmail.com> <61283600-A41A-4A8A-92F9-7FAFF54DD175@ixsystems.com> <20160704183643.GI41276@mordor.lan> <AE372BF0-02BE-4BF3-9073-A05DB4E7FE34@ixsystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--3MMMIZFJzhAsRj/+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 11:56:57AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: >=20 > > On Jul 4, 2016, at 11:36 AM, Julien Cigar <julien@perdition.city> wrote: > >=20 > > I think the discussion evolved a bit since I started this thread, the > > original purpose was to build a low-cost redundant storage for a small > > infrastructure, no more no less. > >=20 > > The context is the following: I work in a small company, partially > > financed by public funds, we started small, evolved a bit to a point > > that some redundancy is required for $services.=20 > > Unfortunately I'm alone to take care of the infrastructure (and it's=20 > > only 50% of my time) and we don't have that much money :(=20 >=20 > Sure, I get that part also, but let=E2=80=99s put the entire conversation= into context: >=20 > 1. You=E2=80=99re looking for a solution to provide some redundant storag= e in a very specific scenario. >=20 > 2. We=E2=80=99re talking on a public mailing list with a bunch of folks, = so the conversation is also naturally going to go from the specific to the = general - e.g. =E2=80=9CIs there anything of broader applicability to be le= arned / used here?=E2=80=9D I=E2=80=99m speaking more to the larger audien= ce who is probably wondering if there=E2=80=99s a more general solution her= e using the same =E2=80=9Cmoving parts=E2=80=9D. of course..! It has been an interesting discussion, learned some things, and it's always enjoyable to get different point of view. >=20 > To get specific again, I am not sure I would do what you are contemplatin= g given your circumstances since it=E2=80=99s not the cheapest / simplest s= olution. The cheapest / simplest solution would be to create 2 small ZFS s= ervers and simply do zfs snapshot replication between them at periodic inte= rvals, so you have a backup copy of the data for maximum safety as well as = a physically separate server in case one goes down hard. Disk storage is t= he cheap part now, particularly if you have data redundancy and can therefo= re use inexpensive disks, and ZFS replication is certainly =E2=80=9Cgood en= ough=E2=80=9D for disaster recovery. As others have said, adding additiona= l layers will only increase the overall fragility of the solution, and =E2= =80=9Cfragile=E2=80=9D is kind of the last thing you need when you=E2=80=99= re frantically trying to deal with a server that has gone down for what cou= ld be any number of reasons. >=20 > I, for example, use a pair of FreeNAS Minis at home to store all my media= and they work fine at minimal cost. I use one as the primary server that = talks to all of the VMWare / Plex / iTunes server applications (and serves = as a backup device for all my iDevices) and it replicates the entire pool t= o another secondary server that can be pushed into service as the primary i= f the first one loses a power supply / catches fire / loses more than 1 dri= ve at a time / etc. Since I have a backup, I can also just use RAIDZ1 for = the 4x4Tb drive configuration on the primary and get a good storage / redun= dancy ratio (I can lose a single drive without data loss but am also not wa= sting a lot of storage on parity). You're right, I'll definitively reconsider the zfs send / zfs receive approach. >=20 > Just my two cents. There are a lot of different ways to do this, and lik= e all things involving computers (especially PCs), the simplest way is usua= lly the best. >=20 Thanks! Julien > - Jordan >=20 --=20 Julien Cigar Belgian Biodiversity Platform (http://www.biodiversity.be) PGP fingerprint: EEF9 F697 4B68 D275 7B11 6A25 B2BB 3710 A204 23C0 No trees were killed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. --3MMMIZFJzhAsRj/+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCgAGBQJXermQAAoJELK7NxCiBCPAxloP/0EHtudE2MmOGNtgttmTGNGN KLLGYcaoDZI4sn2t/q+48oBNfTDPdkHnsXDhGgVRXcQ4yXTuBg9IzcqezwNB+lGb FaC5ckFLqBlXzXUo2Y4lia6T45MtH4QrZn9GPH6O4QfvIQp0ulmCEtVVIUKw/fuA tanEGTTwc6qMhdzd1Uopml2HZJ74SzGmavFf/N4eP3Gnzz/p9a6SQjCH7TAtvxH7 ck6AM3teS79eGdb2BmU6Ehs9A10LZefnleRfMLi2V7RDNNXP2oI4ohI00dTRz1Cf GrcmPB4oRlGEonbMBytYZVOTdrwCGsFyrXTnT7xy4XHCg/9ndUZDcnnDTD8syEBL CFz8l/uZB++l0lAs8a+RyarTNRSMvTznrS039IaOHhD23M/zGXLGVe8EwQlpkwom I/3UUQeQI1291Xnq12PPJUKE2SK8gZ9eJWswO97eXJow7ky1L2bIc3HFUkpkDu9y pPbrMtzslTdfCb4w2SHlE1yJn0/Mo/FyKMuPKbHP5uBDvVoc5PpH912Tcg544Ose ChriAsDJ1Fy23pg52wj/W5zXCzfMjTKLmokNwV3xH4c8wbpFo7jm7IR9lA8BoFME dNSSnLPF3mPFAc4TUM0hS980cPAYE5ovoKMwsOWPR0YEhwtFGZp5xUdpMdkrpnAA SbW49On9C/KPLhfK+NFp =TMxe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3MMMIZFJzhAsRj/+--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160704193131.GJ41276>