Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 16:24:56 +0200 From: Fabian Keil <freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de> To: "Anders =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E4ggstr=F6m?=" <hagge.lists@intercorner.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD + ZFS on a production server? Message-ID: <20080608162456.1c4949bc@fabiankeil.de> In-Reply-To: <1a5a68400806080604ped08ce8p120fc21107e7de81@mail.gmail.com> References: <1a5a68400806080604ped08ce8p120fc21107e7de81@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/AG4Y2cHj54yExEx.RPFMluv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Anders H=E4ggstr=F6m" <hagge.lists@intercorner.net> wrote: > I plan to install a web server for production use and ZFS looks very > interesting, especially since it has built-in support for RAID and > checksum. >=20 > The hardware is already purchased, a 1U-casis with a PhemonX4 9550 > CPU, 4GB ECC RAM @ 800MHz and 2x500GB SATA disks and I am about to > select the operating system to use. >=20 > The choice is probably between "Debian 4.0r3", "FreeBSD 7.0" and > "OpenSolaris 2008.05". All of them have their pros and cons. Just in case you assume that ZFS on OpenSolaris 2008.05 would be superior to ZFS on FreeBSD, this hasn't been my experience. On a system with an Athlon 1700+ and only 512 MB of RAM, receiving snapshots on OpenSolaris renders the GUI pretty much useless. On FreeBSD ZFS operations can cause delays as well, but it's significantly better than on OpenSolaris, even though FreeBSD's ZFS pool lies on a geli-encrypted gmirror while OpenSolaris uses the disk directly. Note that the system is below Sun's recommended specifications for ZFS, though. Things may look differently on more powerful systems. > I think Debian / Linux, almost falls off because it lacks support for > native ZFS and I have not found any alternative filesystem that offer > checksums on the fly. >=20 > My main question is: How is the support for ZFS on FreeBSD? Is it > sufficiently stable and fast enough to be used in production yet? It probably depends on your workload, you'll find several complaints in the archives. It works fine for me, but I haven't tried it on web servers yet. If I were to install a web server today, though, I'd definitely go with ZFS (on FreeBSD). > If not, is there any alternative filesystem that offers checksums on > the fly or other similar technology to reduce the risk of a corrupt > filesystem that at the same time plays well with software RAID (RAID-1 > in particular)? You can use geli(8) for checksumming, it can be combined with gmirror but unless with ZFS, you don't get automatic "self-healing". Fabian --Sig_/AG4Y2cHj54yExEx.RPFMluv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkhL67gACgkQBYqIVf93VJ2w7ACfQKLcgCWfoTM4YJ8TKlCFfQ4T 8G0An3NnuY08XbyNC+t/pPSopMlJJtrh =sdYp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/AG4Y2cHj54yExEx.RPFMluv--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080608162456.1c4949bc>