Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:54:45 -0500 From: Paul Mather <paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> To: "Eugene M. Zheganin" <emz@norma.perm.ru> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs, 1 gig of RAM and periodic weekly Message-ID: <93DCA53D-B71F-4B67-8CEF-CDECF3829C6D@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> In-Reply-To: <4F4C53B6.6060909@norma.perm.ru> References: <4F4B0F83.4090600@norma.perm.ru> <B1D93647-EDA3-49EF-85F4-4FF2AA5A893D@mac.com> <977febd5710ecac8cd9ea374ca0193f4.squirrel@109.169.62.232> <4F4C53B6.6060909@norma.perm.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 27, 2012, at 11:10 PM, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: > Hi. >=20 > On 28.02.2012 01:02, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote: >> regardless of the pool size ? >>=20 >> I was planning on making an atom board a file server for my home, and = I have two options: soekris >> net6501 2GB RAM and intel board powered by the 330 atom (says 2GB = limited as well). My plans are >> to use from 4 up to 8 disks, and they should be 2TB at least. >>=20 >> As its for home use, some p2p software and mostly music listening and = sometimes movie streaming. >>=20 >> should 2GB be that bad, that I should drop it and use UFS instead ? >>=20 >> I may run any version of FreeBSD on it, was planning on 9-STABLE or = 9.1. >>=20 > In the same time I have a couple of hosts successfully running zfs on = 768 Megs and on 1 Gig of RAM. Both i386. > And they aren't affected by the periodic weekly for some reason. And = they are used only as fileservers. Basically the same story here: I am using a FreeBSD/i386 system with 768 = MB of RAM running RELENG_8 with 4 x 1 TB drives arranged as a RAIDZ1 = vdev. It is used as a Bacula server, backing up to the ZFS pool (with = ZFS compression enabled). It has been rock solid, and I've had no = problems with any of the periodic jobs. Here are the ZFS-related tunings I have in /boot/loader.conf: vm.kmem_size=3D"640M" vm.kmem_size_max=3D"640M" vfs.zfs.arc_max=3D"512M" vfs.zfs.txg.timeout=3D"5" If you are planning on using P2P a lot, I had heard that large files = fetched via Bittorrent can become very fragmented under ZFS (due to the = COW nature of ZFS and the way Bittorrent fetches files), especially if = the pool is very full, and so ZFS might not be the best thing to use if = you are also planning on streaming these files, especially on modest = hardware. UFS might be preferable in these circumstances. Cheers, Paul.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?93DCA53D-B71F-4B67-8CEF-CDECF3829C6D>