From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855D71381FB for ; Fri, 28 Dec 2012 23:55:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 33A7121C002; Fri, 28 Dec 2012 23:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f42.google.com (mail-bk0-f42.google.com [209.85.214.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B77421C002 for ; Fri, 28 Dec 2012 23:54:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-bk0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ji2so4882698bkc.15 for ; Fri, 28 Dec 2012 15:54:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type; bh=ue5TG1zB6WS4AvFmRh4rmlStAVOky3u1TWmGHD+w6fc=; b=aAVVohfbkjUcJOyNiCx9qdsS/8J6BxrAY1Afr4MUJQWo2vifHvcSrVmcEwhwHdGlEw tdbSV5vGqTulELqtwatuirJfrv5AJ9u7LhxVs7rxzi6YN3FX5F9tZSOUvMlAuyQFn3C2 JhT6D8d1756spln1oQ/2ts7cqmMTh58nP9WxWnv6l5nUo63xznw5MlXdzUtD3J0J+RLU VPuiRl2kc5HxohIepXTZO8j6rBNPtE0w7BG5mwKnQX+bb/IFauT/bH+68MD6kE9ejaWJ CaTrVOYkhtWFKqtO2zpqVQVFBr0RZCHseyeR5pXiA2BDvWck8NTaY68pHm/e9We1wIx9 FCAA== X-Received: by 10.204.9.139 with SMTP id l11mr16475170bkl.133.1356738850818; Fri, 28 Dec 2012 15:54:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localnet (p4FC601CB.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.198.1.203]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l17sm23784544bkw.12.2012.12.28.15.54.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 28 Dec 2012 15:54:10 -0800 (PST) From: Volker Armin Hemmann To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Scott Ellis Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] experiences with zfsonlinux? Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 00:54:07 +0100 Message-ID: <6433509.kq8CEO1PH8@localhost> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.4 (Linux/3.4.24; KDE/4.9.4; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1785965.eefX9SYzkP@localhost> <50DE011C.5040701@xunil.at> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Archives-Salt: 1843abf8-15cb-448e-a88f-2222099f45af X-Archives-Hash: 1dacb85f20584bb29484bb9c7506638e Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2012, 15:21:54 schrieb Scott Ellis: > Yeah, I use ZoL for my home server (mostly pictures, videos, and mp3s= ) and > it works just fine. SSD for the / and /boot, and then ZFS for all th= e > important data in a mirrored pool. Highly recommended. (Just update= d to > 3.7.1 kernel and 0.6.0-rc13 ZoL, with no issues, in case you were wor= ried > about usage with "current" pieces.) I am conservative with kernels=20 uname -a Linux localhost 3.4.24 #1 SMP Sun Dec 23 17:47:00 CET 2012 x86_64 AMD=20= Phenom(tm) II X4 955 Processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux so that is not a concern of mine. I am more worried about stability. I = plan to=20 put /var and my data pile on it. While losing the first would be a time= =20 intensive incident losing the second would be really painful. Even with= =20 backups. But it would something I could recover from or I would not waste time t= hinking=20 about zfs - mdadm+whatever fs does work good enough. Gl=FCck Auf, Volker --=20 #163933