On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:08:14AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > > It's not clear to me what problem you are trying to solve and why ZFS would be > a good solution for it. The elephant in the room, with regards your use case, > is backups, IMHO. That said:
Long term integrity of the data, i.e., avoiding bit rot/silent data corruption. Regular backups offer no such protection. > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:07:57PM -0400, Nick Lidakis wrote: > > With one user reading one FLAC file at a time from a machine running ZFS > > does one need a modern CPU and gobs of RAM? I understand ECC RAM and a 64 > > bit > > OS is recommended. > > Omitting ZFS, absolutely not. I'd be very surprised if you couldn't do this > with ZFS too, even on something like a Raspberry Pi. I used to use mt-daapd to > real- time decode MP3s, AACs and FLACs to 16/44.1 WAV and stream over 801.11g > to various devices, using an old ARM-powered NAS device (thecus n2100) which > is very underpowered by today's standards. Omitting ZFS, I have no issues serving FLAC files the same with a Pentium III. But I'm reading that ZFS needs *some* muscle for checksums and other such operations. The questions I'd like answered is whether I can get away with using older hardware for ZFS and a single user reading data whilst still using it as my desktop. Or, older hardware would be fine for a dedicated NAS box running ZFS. If I do use my desktop as a ZFS/NAS server, does the root file system have to be ZFS as well? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130924183335.GA1930@phobos
