Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:10:30 +0600 From: "Eugene M. Zheganin" <emz@norma.perm.ru> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs, 1 gig of RAM and periodic weekly Message-ID: <4F4C53B6.6060909@norma.perm.ru> In-Reply-To: <977febd5710ecac8cd9ea374ca0193f4.squirrel@109.169.62.232> References: <4F4B0F83.4090600@norma.perm.ru> <B1D93647-EDA3-49EF-85F4-4FF2AA5A893D@mac.com> <977febd5710ecac8cd9ea374ca0193f4.squirrel@109.169.62.232>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi. On 28.02.2012 01:02, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote: > 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. > In the same time I have a couple of hosts successfully running zfs on 768 Megs and on 1 Gig of RAM. Both i386. And they aren't affected by the periodic weekly for some reason. And they are used only as fileservers. So when I see all these advices to add a gazillion gigabytes of RAM to use zfs - I don't see the connection. Eugene.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F4C53B6.6060909>