ZFS root on single SSD?
drizzt321 at gmail.com
Mon May 22 06:26:49 UTC 2017
Yea, pretty much this. Don't need the same level of availability. Worst
case, I'm a bit annoyed and rebuild the OS and restore the configs from
backup. Now I just need to figure out jails and bhyve for the services
since I haven't worked with either before :) There's a couple of bhyve
front ends I've been looking at, sorta on the fence for which one. Really I
just need to pick one and run with it.
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:05 AM, krad <kraduk at gmail.com> wrote:
> The big question is what availability do you need on this server? As its a
> home system I guess not as much as say an enterprise one. Therefore I would
> imagine all the benefits of manageability that come with zfs will out weigh
> the downside, even if running on a single volume. Boot environments are a
> really big thing to safe guard yourself during upgrade time. Although in
> theory you could do something with ufs its never going to be as good as
> with zfs. Also remember mirroring isnt backup, mirroring is about
> availability. Therefore live with a single drive, but backup the contents
> On 16 May 2017 at 06:45, Aaron <drizzt321 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> So, I've been running ZFS root mirror across 2 spinning disks, and I'm
>> upgrading my home server/nas and planning on running root on a spare SSD.
>> However, I'm unsure if it'd be better to run UFS as a single drive root
>> instead of ZFS, although I do love all of the ZFS features (snapshots,
>> scrubbing, etc) and would still like to keep that for my root drive, even
>> if I'm not mirroring at all. I do notice that FreeBSD has TRIM support for
>> ZFS (see http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Features#TRIM_Support).
>> So is there a good reason NOT to run ZFS root on a single drive SSD?
>> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe
More information about the freebsd-questions