Re: [zfs-discuss] maczfs / ZEVO
On Feb 15, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.commailto:opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com wrote: Anybody using maczfs / ZEVO? Have good or bad things to say, in terms of reliability, performance, features? My main reason for asking is this: I have a mac, I use Time Machine, and I have VM's inside. Time Machine, while great in general, has the limitation of being unable to intelligently identify changed bits inside a VM file. So you have to exclude the VM from Time Machine, and you have to run backup software inside the VM. I would greatly prefer, if it's reliable, to let the VM reside on ZFS and use zfs send to backup my guest VM's. I am not looking to replace HFS+ as the primary filesystem of the mac; although that would be cool, there's often a reliability benefit to staying on the supported, beaten path, standard configuration. But if ZFS can be used to hold the guest VM storage reliably, I would benefit from that. Thanks... ___ ZEVO's great as long as you don't mind managing everything from the command line. I had to figure out how to identify the disks, as it manages them a little differently in MacOS. I had some minor issues hosting iTunes/iPhoto libraries on ZFS volumes, with it being a little more sluggish freezing up slightly. Other than that it worked fine. I'm back on HFS+ for iTunes/iPhoto now, but I'm hopeful it'll be resolved in a future release so I can switch back again. MacZFS will give zpool version 8 zfs version 2, whereas ZEVO is zpool version 28 zfs version 5, so make your decision accordingly. I have not tried MacZFS in a long time, so I couldn't say if it is better or worse than ZEVO. Chris ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] all in one server
On Sep 18, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: On 9/18/2012 10:31 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: I'm currently thinking about rolling a variant of http://www.napp-it.org/napp-it/all-in-one/index_en.html with remote backup (via snapshot and send) to 2-3 other (HP N40L-based) zfs boxes for production in our organisation. The systems themselves would be either Dell or Supermicro (latter with ZIL/L2ARC on SSD, plus SAS disks (pools as mirrors) all with hardware pass-through). The idea is to use zfs for data integrity and backup via data snapshot (especially important data will be also back-up'd via conventional DLT tapes). Before I test thisi -- Is anyone using this is in production? Any caveats? I run an all-in-one and it works fine. Supermicro x9scl-f with 32gb ECC ram. 20 is for the openindiana SAN, with an ibm m1015 passed through via vmdirect (pci passthru). 4 SAS nearline drives in 2x2 mirror config in a jbod chassis. 2 samsung 830 128gb ssds as l2arc. The main caveat is to order the VMs properly for auto-start (assuming you use that as I do.) The OI VM goes first, and I give a good 120 seconds before starting the other VMs. For auto shutdown, all VMs but OI do suspend, OI does shutdown. The big caveat: do NOT use iSCSI for the datastore, use NFS. Maybe there's a way to fix this, but I found that on start up, ESXi would time out the iSCSI datastore mount before the virtualized SAN VM was up and serving the share - bad news. NFS seems to be more resilient there. vmxnet3 vnics should work fine for OI VM, but might want to stick to e1000. Can I actually have a year's worth of snapshots in zfs without too much performance degradation? Dunno about that. I did something similar: http://churnd.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/zfsesxi-all-in-one-part-1/ Works great… need to bump up the RAM to 32GB. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
