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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. Daniel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FD06FD7.2000708>