Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 11:18:53 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Recommendations for a new server Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1405301116230.8371@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <5388B5BE.6050609@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <CAHieY7Ros7sXaOpWdR7E0fZvT_m%2Bz%2Bj79CaE8szxvBEyJeHhFg@mail.gmail.com> <5388B5BE.6050609@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 30 May 2014, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 05/30/14 16:11, Alejandro Imass wrote: >> The new server has a 2 x 1TB RE4 3ware 9650SE RAID and I have friends that >> tell me is actually better to use ZFS RAID instead of HW RAID1. Is this >> true? Why so? > > I recently had a similar setup using an old 3ware RAID card, which we > upgraded to 4TB drives .... and then had to ditch the 3ware card and > replace it with a LSI HBA because the 3ware card didn't recognise > anything beyond the first 2TB or the drives. > > Yes, you want to use ZFS RAID rather than putting ZFS onto a single > virtual drive presented by your RAID controller. ZFS does all the > resilience and patrol read^W^Wzpool scrubbing and disk IO caching and > stuff using your system's main RAM and CPUs which are generally a lot > more capable than any RAID controller. Plus ZFS does it better -- > 'punctured stripe' is not something that happens to ZFS for instance. Another way to explain this is that ZFS makes the computer itself into a RAID controller, only with more resources and much more development of the "firmware".
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1405301116230.8371>