Quoting "Eugene M. Zheganin" <e...@norma.perm.ru> (from Tue, 28 Feb
2012 10:10:30 +0600):
Hi.
On 28.02.2012 01:02, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
regardless of the pool size ?
I was planning on making an atom board a file server for my home,
and I have two options: soekris
net6501 2GB RAM and intel board powered by the 330 atom (says 2GB
limited as well). My plans are
to use from 4 up to 8 disks, and they should be 2TB at least.
As its for home use, some p2p software and mostly music listening
and sometimes movie streaming.
should 2GB be that bad, that I should drop it and use UFS instead ?
I may run any version of FreeBSD on it, was planning on 9-STABLE or 9.1.
In the same time I have a couple of hosts successfully running zfs
on 768 Megs and on 1 Gig of RAM. Both i386.
And they aren't affected by the periodic weekly for some reason. And
they are used only as fileservers.
So when I see all these advices to add a gazillion gigabytes of RAM
to use zfs - I don't see the connection.
The connection is performance and/or lack of tuning.
At home I haven't a problem to run a system with ZFS and 768MB and 1GB
(well, the 1GB system has hardware problems, so it is degraded to a
toybox to test things now, but ZFS is still rock solid on it). At a
place where more than a handfull of people would access such a system
in a way where the performance of big file transfers matter (not
streaming, not just watching a movie on one system, ...), I would also
recommend more RAM.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
Michelle: You expect me to live in a tiny little hole?
Fry: It'd be deeper, but I'm standing on a gopher.
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
