Jan Betlach wrote:
> - FFS seems to be reliable and stable enough for my purpose. ZFS is too > complicated and bloated (of course it has its advantages), however major > factor for me has been that it is not possible to encrypt ZFS natively > on FreeBSD as of now. Illumos distro OmniOS CE https://omniosce.org/ has support for native encryption since r151032 https://github.com/omniosorg/omnios-build/blob/r151032/doc/ReleaseNotes.md Patrick Marchand wrote: > Hi, > > > I'll be playing around with DragonflyBSD Hammer2 (and multiple offsite > backups) for a home NAS over the next few weeks. I'll probably do a > presentation about the experience at the Montreal BSD user group > afterwards. It does not require as many ressources as ZFS or BTRFS, > but offers many similar features. > Been there, done that! dfly# uname -a DragonFly dfly.int.bagdala2.net 5.6-RELEASE DragonFly v5.6.2-RELEASE #26: Sun Aug 11 16:04:07 EDT 2019 r...@dfly.int.bagdala2.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/X86_64_GENERIC x86_64 # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass# /dev/serno/B620550018.s1a /boot ufs rw 1 1 # /dev/serno/B620550018.s1b none swap sw 0 0 # Next line adds swapcache on the separate HDD instead of original swap commented out above /dev/serno/451762B0E46228230099.s1b none swap sw 0 0 /dev/serno/B620550018.s1d / hammer rw 1 1 /pfs/var /var null rw 0 0 /pfs/tmp /tmp null rw 0 0 /pfs/home /home null rw 0 0 /pfs/usr.obj /usr/obj null rw 0 0 /pfs/var.crash /var/crash null rw 0 0 /pfs/var.tmp /var/tmp null rw 0 0 proc /proc procfs rw 0 0 # Added by Predrag Punosevac /dev/serno/ZDS01176.s1a /data hammer rw 2 2 /dev/serno/5QG00WTH.s1a /mirror hammer rw 2 2 # /dev/serno/5QG00XF0.s1e /test-hammer2 hammer2 rw 2 2 # Mount pseudo file systems from the master drive which is used as a backup for my desktop /data/pfs/backups /data/backups null rw 0 0 /data/pfs/nfs /data/nfs null rw 0 0 H2 lacks built in backup mechanism. I was hoping that H2 will get some kind "hammer mirror-copy" of H1, or "zfs send/receive". My server is still on H1 and I really enjoy being able to continuously back it up. That's the only thing I am missing in H2. On the positive note H2 did get support for boot environment manager last year. https://github.com/newnix/dfbeadm Also DF jails are stuck in 2004 or something like that. I like their NFSv3. DragonFly which gets it software RAID discipline through old unmaintained FreeBSD natacontrol utility. Hardware RAID cards are not frequently tested and community seems to be keen on treating DF as a desktop OS rather than a storage workhorse. Having said that HDD are cheap this days and home users probably don't need anything bigger than a 12TB mirror. Zhi-Qiang Lei wrote: > 1. FreeBSD was my first consideration because of ZFS, but as far as I > know, ZFS doesn't work well with RAID controller, Of course not. ZFS is a volume manager and file system in one. How would ZFS detect errors and do self-healing if it relies on the HW Raid controller to get the info about block devices? > and neither FreeBSD > nor OpenBSD has a driver for the B120i array controller on the > mainboard (HP is to be blamed). I could use AHCI mode instead RAID > which also suits ZFS of FreeBSD, yet there is a notorious fan noise > issue of that approach. > That is not a genuine HWRaid card. That is a build in software raid. You should not be using that crap. > 2. A HP P222 array controller works right out of the box on > OpenBSD, maybe FreeBSD as well but the combination of ZFS and RAID > controller seems weird to me. > FreeBSD has a better support for HWRaid cards than OpenBSD. I am talking about serious HWRaid cards like former LSI Controllers. Only Areca used to fully support OpenBSD. Also FreeBSD UFS journaling is more advanced than OpenBSD journaling. However unless you put H1 on H2 on the top of hardware RAID you will not get COW, snapshots, history, and all other stuff with any version of UFS. I know people on this list who prefer HWRaid and also know people on this list who prefer softward (including ZFS). > 3. OpenBSD is actually out of my expectation. CIFS and NFS is just > easy to setup. The most fabulous thing to me is the full disk > encryption. I had a disk failure and the array controller was burnt > once because I had some cooling issue. However, I was confident to get > a replacement and no data was lost. OpenBSD NFS server implementation is slow comparing to others but for home users YMMV. OpenBSD softraid RAID 1 discipline although functional (I use on this very desktop) Code: # bioctl sd4 Volume Status Size Device softraid0 0 Online 2000396018176 sd4 RAID1 0 Online 2000396018176 0:0.0 noencl <sd0a> 1 Online 2000396018176 0:1.0 noencl <sd1a> is very crude. It took me 4 days to rebuild 1TB mirror after accidental power off one HDD. That is just not something usable for a storage purpose in real life. At work where I have to store petabytes of data I use only ZFS. At home that is another story. For the record BTRFS is a vaporware and I would never store the pictures of my kids to that crap. Cheers, Predrag
