> I was just reading stuff about ZFS, and wonder if it would be
>beneficial for me to use it. I store a lots of multimedia files in my
>HD, they usually have the size of > 1GB (e.g. 1.2, 1.7 or even
>bigger), and my system is running UFS.
> so can I buy a new HD, say 500GB, and format it ZFS style and use it
>along with other UFS? and will ZFS performs better than UFS in my
>situation? Thank you!!
Correct me if im wrong but zfs seems way to experimental and unstable
according to what I have found on net so far.
FYI - I decided to use UFS in mean while, but for those interested in why I
I share other NB server roles with my file server and cannot afford lockups
Please anyone correct me if im wrong!
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Wojciech Puchar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> all the input from various users I assume zfs would be the file system of
>> choice for such large volumes?
>> Are there limitations or downsides using UFS on such a large volume?
> no, unless you will create it with default options.
> use -i big-power-of-two simply to have enough inodes for your files, but
> 100 times too much. too much inodes=more wasted space AND VERY SLOW FSCK
> use -b 32768 or 65536 depending of your file's average size.
> -b 16384 will work too, but again fsck may be long.
> of course turn on softupdates.
> UFS performs excellent on large drives/volumes. not in theory but in
> practice, i use it every place, on volumes up to 3GB
> NO PROBLEMS.
>> Also are there any tools for recovery off ZFS volumes? Accidental
> firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
__________ NOD32 3628 (20081120) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"