The magic of ZFS and NFS (2nd try)

[Rick Macklem]

Rainer Duffner wrote:
> 
> > Am 21.02.2015 um 19:23 schrieb Jordan Hubbard <jkh at ixsystems.com>:
> > 
> > 
> >> On Feb 21, 2015, at 9:36 AM, Christian Baer
> >> <christian.baer at uni-dortmund.de> wrote:
> >> 
> >> But why shouldn't I use /etc/exports? I have read people writing
> >> this (don't
> >> use /etc/exports) in forums when searching for answers, however
> >> the current
> >> manpage for zfs says this:
> > 
> > FreeNAS has more experience with sharing things from ZFS than
> > anyone else in the BSD community (that’s not hyperbole, it’s
> > simply fact).  We don’t use any of the zfs sharing flags.  Those
> > were intended more for Solaris (sharesmb, for example - FreeBSD
> > lets you do that, but what does it *mean* when you don’t have a
> > native CIFS service?).   FreeBSD has never integrated ZFS’s notion
> > of sharing or, for that matter, a number of other things like
> > drive hot sparing and automatic replacement, and you’re seeing the
> > results of ZFS’s solaris roots still not lining up 100% with their
> > new FreeBSD home.  That’s all.
> > 
> > I would simplify things, just as FreeNAS has (for good reasons),
> > and simply have ZFS be “a filesystem” from FreeBSD’s perspective
> > and share it just as you would UFS.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> I admit I don’t use NFS v4.
> Is it much faster than NFS v3 these days?
> 
Nope. If you are lucky, you'll be about performance neutral when
switching from v3 -> v4. If you access lots of files, you probably
won't be performance neutral, due to the extra overhead of Opens, etc.

NFSv4 isn't really a replacement for NFSv3 imho. It fills a different,
although somewhat overlapping solution space. It provides better byte
range locking, ACLs and, when pNFS becomes commonly available, better
scalability for I/O performance on relatively large servers (especially
if the clients are accessing a fairly small number of large files).
If you don't need any of the above, you don't need/want NFSv4, again imho.

Sorry to wander off topic, but Rainer did ask;-) rick

> But I’ve always added the line from exports(5) into the sharenfs
> property like
> 
> zfs get sharenfs datapool/nfs/ds3-documents
> NAME                        PROPERTY  VALUE
>                                                       SOURCE
> datapool/nfs/ds3-documents  sharenfs   -maproot=1003 -network
> 10.10.10.0 -mask 255.255.255.0  inherited from datapool/nfs
> 
> These lines get written into /etc/zfs/exports
> 
> I like it that way because if a filesystem is destroyed, I don’t have
> to remember removing it from /etc/exports.
> 
> I also admit I’m heavily influenced by Solaris on this particular
> setting…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"