We tested ZFS on CentOS 6.4 a few months ago using a descend Supermicro
server with 16GB RAM and 11 drives on RaidZ3. Same specs as a middle range
storage server that we build mainly using FreeBSD.
Performance was not bad but eventually we run into a situation were we
could not import a pool anymore after a kernel / modules update.
I would not recommend it for production...
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Lists <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/24/2013 02:47 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
> > You didn't mention XFS.
> > Just curious if you considered it or not.
>
> Most definitely. There are a few features that I'm looking for:
>
> 1) MOST IMPORTANT: STABLE!
>
> 2) The ability to make the partition bigger by adding drives with very
> minimal/no downtime.
>
> 3) The ability to remove an older, (smaller) drive or drives in order to
> replace with larger capacity drives without downtime or having to copy
> over all the files manually.
>
> 4) The ability to create snapshots with no downtime.
>
> 5) The ability to synchronize snapshots quickly and without having to
> scan every single file. (backups)
>
> 6) Reasonable failure mode. Things *do* go south sometimes. Simple is
> better, especially when it's simpler for the (typically highly stressed)
> administrator.
>
> 7) Big. Basically all filesystems in question can handle our size
> requirements. We might hit a 100 TB partition in the next 5 years.
>
> I think ZFS and BTRFS are the only candidates that claim to do all the
> above. Btrfs seems to have been "stable in a year or so" for as long as
> I could keep a straight face around the word "Gigabyte", so it's a
> non-starter at this point.
>
> LVM2/Ext4 can do much of the above. However, horror stories abound,
> particularly around very large volumes. Also, LVM2 can be terrible in
> failure situations.
>
> XFS does snapshots, but don't you have to freeze the volume first?
> Xfsrestore looks interesting for backups, though I don't know if there's
> a consistent "freeze point". (what about ongoing writes?) Not sure about
> removing HDDs in a volume with XFS.
>
> Not as sure about ZFS' stability on Linux (those who run direct Unix
> derivatives seem to rave about it) and failure modes.
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
--
George Kontostanos
---
http://www.aisecure.net
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
