From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 25 17:47:18 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A45106568C for ; Mon, 25 May 2009 17:47:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arab@tangerine-army.co.uk) Received: from smtp-out4.blueyonder.co.uk (smtp-out4.blueyonder.co.uk [195.188.213.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698338FC1C for ; Mon, 25 May 2009 17:47:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arab@tangerine-army.co.uk) Received: from [172.23.170.142] (helo=anti-virus02-09) by smtp-out4.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1M8eGV-0007MB-Lm; Mon, 25 May 2009 18:47:11 +0100 Received: from [94.168.153.236] (helo=Mercury.galaxy.lan.lcl) by asmtp-out5.blueyonder.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1M8eGV-0000TW-0u; Mon, 25 May 2009 18:47:11 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 18:47:10 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <01FB8F39BAD0BD49A6D0DA8F7897392956CB@Mercury.galaxy.lan.lcl> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: FreeBSD & Software RAID Thread-Index: AcndW7GWUY/kFT/FQRCDPaODR5mdBQAA043g From: "Graeme Dargie" To: "Wojciech Puchar" , Cc: Howard Jones , Valentin Bud Subject: RE: FreeBSD & Software RAID X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 17:47:19 -0000 -----Original Message----- From: Wojciech Puchar [mailto:wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl]=20 Sent: 25 May 2009 18:09 To: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org Cc: Howard Jones; Graeme Dargie; Valentin Bud Subject: Re: FreeBSD & Software RAID > > I have looked at ZFS recently. Appears to be a memory hog, needs about 1 > GB especially if large file transfers may occur over gigabit ethernet while it CAN be set up on 256MB machine with a little big flags in=20 loader.conf (should be autotuned anyway) - it generally takes as much=20 memory as it's available, and LOTS of CPU power. with similar operations ZFS takes 10-20 TIMES more CPU than UFS and it's NOT faster than properly configured UFS. doesn't make any sense _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Ok granted this is a server sat in my house and it is not a "mission" critical server in a large business, personally I have can live with ZFS taking a bit longer vs resilience. From just looking at my system at the moment I have 1.8GB of free ram from a total of 4GB. Regards=20 Graeme