Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:17:44 +0200 From: "Claus Guttesen" <kometen@gmail.com> To: "Vivek Khera" <vivek@khera.org> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: large RAID volume partition strategy Message-ID: <b41c75520708200217t20295600sbfeefef4cfd19648@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3A05E0E7-403E-4203-9B9B-AC78549D4E17@khera.org> References: <31BB09D7-B58A-47AC-8DD1-6BB8141170D8@khera.org> <b41c75520708171510i38594117sc55dfabf06ea302@mail.gmail.com> <3A05E0E7-403E-4203-9B9B-AC78549D4E17@khera.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > If you want to avoid the long fsck-times your remaining options are a > > journaling filesystem or zfs, either requires an upgrade from freebsd > > 6.2. I have used zfs and had a serverstop due to powerutage in out > > area. Our zfs-samba-server came up fine with no data corruption. So I > > will suggest freebsd 7.0 with zfs. > > But, if I don't go with zfs, which would be a better way to slice the > space up: RAID volumes exported as individual disks to freebsd, or > one RAID volume divided into multiple logical partitions with disklabel? If you want to place data and the transaction-log on different partitions you want to be shure they reside on different physical disks so you probably want option 1. -- regards Claus When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, the gentlest gamester is the soonest winner. Shakespeare
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b41c75520708200217t20295600sbfeefef4cfd19648>