From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Fri Feb 22 16:16:14 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8B514F22D7 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:16:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from mail.kronometrix.org (mail.kronometrix.org [95.85.46.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.kronometrix.org", Issuer "mail.kronometrix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29A5773C8D for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:16:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) Received: from [192.168.1.191] (213-216-249-17.bb.dnainternet.fi [213.216.249.17]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.kronometrix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x1MGGA9k054615 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:16:11 GMT (envelope-from sparvu@kronometrix.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.kronometrix.org: Host 213-216-249-17.bb.dnainternet.fi [213.216.249.17] claimed to be [192.168.1.191] From: Stefan Parvu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\)) Subject: Re: RBPI3B+ FreeBSD 12 ZFS Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:16:04 +0200 References: <5D976A97-9800-4A9F-A155-F3BD998AFB4C@kronometrix.org> <19ed5715-f1f1-6c5d-5dc6-e9c5225e5445@denninger.net> To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <19ed5715-f1f1-6c5d-5dc6-e9c5225e5445@denninger.net> Message-Id: <1ED1A0A0-C569-433C-9341-30C40BC4CBF7@kronometrix.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 29A5773C8D X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sparvu@kronometrix.org designates 95.85.46.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sparvu@kronometrix.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.97 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-arm@freebsd.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.87)[0.867,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mail.kronometrix.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.61)[0.609,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kronometrix.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.83)[0.826,0]; IP_SCORE(0.48)[asn: 14061(2.48), country: US(-0.07)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:95.85.0.0/18, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 16:16:14 -0000 > I'm trying to figure out the use case. First of all Im trying to understand, if this would even work on a 64bit=20= RBPI board and STABLE 12.0. Just curiosity. I do recall old days when I = was working in Sun ZFS systems would require some RAM to work correctly. Then we found more robust and resilient ZFS for different workloads than = UFS regarding data corruption, power outages etc. So I was thinking I could = experiment with our application RBPI UFS and replace that with ZFS.=20 thanks for pointers. appreciated. Stefan=