Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:09:43 +0300 From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Netflix's New Peering Appliance Uses FreeBSD Message-ID: <4FD06FD7.2000708@digsys.bg> In-Reply-To: <3CEF3B39-BE1E-4FC4-81F3-D26049C83313@netflix.com> References: <CAMYW4Zi4y16EL1=%2Bsfz1XATc9ZnQpocUD_Xf9Jg=LR=c1AgaKA@mail.gmail.com> <3CEF3B39-BE1E-4FC4-81F3-D26049C83313@netflix.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 06.06.12 03:16, Scott Long wrote: [...] > Each disk has its own UFS+J filesystem, except for > the SSDs that are mirrored together with gmirror. The SSDs hold the OS image > and cache some of the busiest content. The other disks hold nothing but the > audio and video files for our content streams. Could you please explain the rationale of using UFS+J for this large storage. Your published documentation states that you have reasonable redundancy in case of multiple disk failure and I wonder how you handle this with "plain" UFS. Things like avoiding hangs and panics when an disk is going to die. Danielhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FD06FD7.2000708>