From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 27 05:44:57 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97C548B0 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:44:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from uk1rly2283.eechost.net (uk1rly2283.eechost.net [217.69.47.236]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F15CFE2 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:44:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [31.186.37.179] (helo=smtp.marelmo.com) by uk1rly2283.eechost.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WT38L-00039c-I0 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:45:45 +0000 Received: from [192.168.63.1] (helo=steve.marelmo.com) by smtp.marelmo.com with smtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1WT37O-00025U-59 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:44:46 +0000 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:44:45 +0000 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: file systems Message-Id: <20140327054445.b106a8cbe86341286bde4f28@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.3.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Auth-Info: 15567@permanet.ie (plain) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:44:57 -0000 On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:38:47 -0300 Friedrich Locke wrote: > Hi folks, > > i am in need to install *BSD on a 16T partition. I would like to OBSD, but > someone from the OBSD community told me that altough OBSD uses ufs2, fsck > would take to much time and memory against this partition. > > I wonder if FBSD can really handle large partition with no side effects. > What FS should i use with FBSD? I would strongly suggest using ZFS for a partition of that size the data integrity protection becomes more and more important the larger the file system. By ZFS standards 16TB is quite small. If the data is of any real value then you really want to be using some kind of protection I would go for being protected against two drive failures on that scale (RAIDZ2 in ZFS, RAID6 on a hardware RAID, or a three way mirror but that would use a lot of drives). If you do go with ZFS don't use a hardware RAID let ZFS manage the drives. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith