Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
On 8/14/09, Tim Gustafson wrote: >> Valid point. I didn't make the clarification that I should >> have. graid3 and gmirror have reached the maturity and >> dedicated to the system, whereas ZFS is still experimental. >> When ZFS is no longer considered experimental, I would expect >> ZFS support in the installer in the same expectation I am >> expecting graid3 and gmirror to be. >> >> It's all about the status of ZFS itself, rather than the fact >> that it works. > > Your point is also valid. However, our experience with ZFS on the boxes > that we have installed it has been nothing but positive since about 7.2, and > Steve Bertrand has also posted that his experiences have been nothing but > positive. I know that ZFS on FreeBSD hasn't gotten a "stable" rating yet, > but it appears to be approaching that level and I don't think putting it in > the installer (and perhaps marking it as "beta") so that more people could > test it and give feedback about bugs and their experiences would be a bad > thing. > > To be clear, ZFS itself is indeed stable - our Solaris file servers are > running it in multi-terabyte configurations on servers that get pounded to > the order of nearly saturating a 1GB LAN link. ZFS is the only file system > in our experience that has suffered no data losses in arrays with more than > one terabyte (knock on wood). All other file systems have failed > disastrously for us in multi-terabyte configurations. So what you're > talking about is not the stability of ZFS itself, but the port of ZFS on > FreeBSD. Exactly. I've used ZFS once, on the box that could benefit from it most. It's a Dell PowerVault 715n NAS, which runs BSD very solid. i386 Pentium 3 @1GHZ, and 1GB RAM. This is back on 7.0 days, and I haven't run it since. I didn't loose any data, because the data on the ZFS was unimportant data that could be lost. It did freak out and panic when I was copying an ISO to/from it. I know that somewhere in 7.2 there was some tuning recommendations on i386, and that 8.0 has an updated version of ZFS that I will run again to try it out. I don't have any amd64 (none!) systems, so this box has to be tortured to be able to even experiment with ZFS. > >> Does this paint a better picture to you of what I forgot to >> clarify in my original posting? > > Yes, clarity is key. Thanks! :) > > Tim Gustafson > Baskin School of Engineering > UC Santa Cruz > t...@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
> Valid point. I didn't make the clarification that I should > have. graid3 and gmirror have reached the maturity and > dedicated to the system, whereas ZFS is still experimental. > When ZFS is no longer considered experimental, I would expect > ZFS support in the installer in the same expectation I am > expecting graid3 and gmirror to be. > > It's all about the status of ZFS itself, rather than the fact > that it works. Your point is also valid. However, our experience with ZFS on the boxes that we have installed it has been nothing but positive since about 7.2, and Steve Bertrand has also posted that his experiences have been nothing but positive. I know that ZFS on FreeBSD hasn't gotten a "stable" rating yet, but it appears to be approaching that level and I don't think putting it in the installer (and perhaps marking it as "beta") so that more people could test it and give feedback about bugs and their experiences would be a bad thing. To be clear, ZFS itself is indeed stable - our Solaris file servers are running it in multi-terabyte configurations on servers that get pounded to the order of nearly saturating a 1GB LAN link. ZFS is the only file system in our experience that has suffered no data losses in arrays with more than one terabyte (knock on wood). All other file systems have failed disastrously for us in multi-terabyte configurations. So what you're talking about is not the stability of ZFS itself, but the port of ZFS on FreeBSD. > Does this paint a better picture to you of what I forgot to > clarify in my original posting? Yes, clarity is key. Thanks! :) Tim Gustafson Baskin School of Engineering UC Santa Cruz t...@soe.ucsc.edu 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
On 8/14/09, Tim Gustafson wrote: >> From: "Tim Judd" >> I don't use ZFS, UFS2 works fine for me. I would find it >> ridiculous to see ZFS support in the installer, but all GEOM >> should be supported. Especially the raid3 and mirror. > > So, you like the idea of including RAID3 and mirror because that suits your > needs, but my desire to see ZFS support is unreasonable because you don't > have a need for ZFS? Valid point. I didn't make the clarification that I should have. graid3 and gmirror have reached the maturity and dedicated to the system, whereas ZFS is still experimental. When ZFS is no longer considered experimental, I would expect ZFS support in the installer in the same expectation I am expecting graid3 and gmirror to be. It's all about the status of ZFS itself, rather than the fact that it works. Does this paint a better picture to you of what I forgot to clarify in my original posting? > > Tim Gustafson > Baskin School of Engineering > UC Santa Cruz > t...@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
Jason Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:48, Tim Gustafson wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering if there was a plan or time line in place to support ZFS >> boot partitions in the installer. I Googled around a bit and found some >> how-to documents for setting it up in a hacky kind of way, but the >> impression I got is that support for ZFS partitions is coming to the >> installer in perhaps 7.3 or 8.0, and I wanted to confirm or dispel that myth >> before I go forward using the hacky method. > > > I wouldn't recommend using zfs at all right now, unless you want random > crashes and lots of missing data.. ESPECIALLY in 8.0,1,2 versions. Do you have significant, long-term experience with "random crashes and lots of missing data"? I have nothing but good things to say about ZFS. I've been using it since 7.0, and one box in particular is put under extreme duress doing network backups daily. Since originally tuned, it has been just as stable as any other box we own. This particular box is configured as Tim's is in another post he wrote (7.2, RAIDZ, boot from UFS flash), and writes at ~160MBps for 6-8 consecutive hours per day. What I would recommend is if you go with -CURRENT and boot from ZFS on a box going into production, ensure that you have very up-to-date backups, stored in a method in which you could very quickly replicate onto another box in case of emergency. Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
I'm responding to two people's comments here in one response. :) > From: "Brian A. Seklecki" > I make the suggestions because you're asking about an > advanced topic, so I gave you an honest answer. Honest answers are appreciated. :) I'm not saying that the way you suggested was invalid, just that there ought to be an "easier" way. > From: "Tim Judd" > And those who are unfamiliar with a system will likely use > the default filesystem an OS provides. That's UFS2 for most > people. For "most people", yes. Most people don't need to be able to install FreeBSD over a serial cable or parallel cable, but those options are included in the installer. > From: "Tim Judd" > Also, since ZFS is a hog when it comes to system resources, > works best on amd64, and many other factors/tuning, you expect > this all to be available if someone wants to install to an > embedded firewall? Or to some little special purpose system? It already is available to everyone...it's just harder to install than it ought to be. A firewall probably doesn't need X11, but that's included in the installer. > From: "Tim Judd" > I don't use ZFS, UFS2 works fine for me. I would find it > ridiculous to see ZFS support in the installer, but all GEOM > should be supported. Especially the raid3 and mirror. So, you like the idea of including RAID3 and mirror because that suits your needs, but my desire to see ZFS support is unreasonable because you don't have a need for ZFS? Tim Gustafson Baskin School of Engineering UC Santa Cruz t...@soe.ucsc.edu 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 08:58 -0700, Tim Gustafson wrote: > then there's no reason that the functionality couldn't or shouldn't be > built into the installer. With a few machines, yes. Once you get to 5 or 6, start building your own custom internal ISOs, and maintain your configuration templates in SVN or use Puppet. I make the suggestions because you're asking about an advanced topic, so I gave you an honest answer. ~BAS ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
On 8/14/09, Tim Gustafson wrote: >> No one has gone near that stuff in years. We don't even >> have gmirror(8) creation support in there. Best not to use >> sysinst. The livefs image has all of the tools that you >> need to bootstrap a system. > > That's a silly answer. The way to get more people to use FreeBSD is to make > the installation process as easy and complete as possible. If bootstrapping > a system using the livefs file system is possible, then there's no reason > that the functionality couldn't or shouldn't be built into the installer. > > Yes, a higher-level sysadmin can do it...but the vast majority of people who > administer servers for a living are not higher-level sysadmins. And those who are unfamiliar with a system will likely use the default filesystem an OS provides. That's UFS2 for most people. Especially since ZFS is still considered experimental, I find it unreasonable to have the installer support something that isn't considered permanent. Also, since ZFS is a hog when it comes to system resources, works best on amd64, and many other factors/tuning, you expect this all to be available if someone wants to install to an embedded firewall? Or to some little special purpose system? I don't use ZFS, UFS2 works fine for me. I would find it ridiculous to see ZFS support in the installer, but all GEOM should be supported. Especially the raid3 and mirror. I think you're expecting the world... Maybe a check is in order. > Tim Gustafson > Baskin School of Engineering > UC Santa Cruz > t...@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
> No one has gone near that stuff in years. We don't even > have gmirror(8) creation support in there. Best not to use > sysinst. The livefs image has all of the tools that you > need to bootstrap a system. That's a silly answer. The way to get more people to use FreeBSD is to make the installation process as easy and complete as possible. If bootstrapping a system using the livefs file system is possible, then there's no reason that the functionality couldn't or shouldn't be built into the installer. Yes, a higher-level sysadmin can do it...but the vast majority of people who administer servers for a living are not higher-level sysadmins. Tim Gustafson Baskin School of Engineering UC Santa Cruz t...@soe.ucsc.edu 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 09:48 -0700, Tim Gustafson wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if there was a plan or time line in place to support > ZFS boot partitions in the installer. No one has gone near that stuff in years. We don't even have gmirror(8) creation support in there. Best not to use sysinst. The livefs image has all of the tools that you need to bootstrap a system. ~BAS ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
> I wouldn't recommend using zfs at all right now, unless you want > random crashes and lots of missing data.. ESPECIALLY in 8.0,1,2 > versions. I'm using 7.2 at the moment with a standard UFS2 boot partition and a 500GB ZFS pool. My ZFS pool actually seems pretty stable. I did a "make -j 16 buildworld buildkernel installkernel installworld" using it as my /usr/src and /usr/obj and it performed beautifully. At the time I did that, it was configured as just a RAIDZ. I've since changed that to RAIDZ2, but I haven't beaten it up yet, so I don't know if there's a difference between the stability of RAIDZ and RAIDZ2. Tim Gustafson Baskin School of Engineering UC Santa Cruz t...@soe.ucsc.edu 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:48, Tim Gustafson wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if there was a plan or time line in place to support ZFS > boot partitions in the installer. I Googled around a bit and found some > how-to documents for setting it up in a hacky kind of way, but the > impression I got is that support for ZFS partitions is coming to the > installer in perhaps 7.3 or 8.0, and I wanted to confirm or dispel that myth > before I go forward using the hacky method. I wouldn't recommend using zfs at all right now, unless you want random crashes and lots of missing data.. ESPECIALLY in 8.0,1,2 versions. Just my 2 cents... > > > Thanks! > > Tim Gustafson > Baskin School of Engineering > UC Santa Cruz > t...@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
My zfs only system works fine but it based on 8-beta2 built around 16 May( will be rebuilding soon) The main thing to remember to do it make sure your have zfs_loader_support="yes" in your src of make.conf I based my install on this howto http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSOnRootWithZFSboot#installFreeBSD If you dont want to go for current in theory if you install the boot blocks and loader from current onto the disk you should be able to boot into 7.2 I havent tested this though On thing I would advise though is don't install the root partition in the root of the zpool I have mine like this system68.1G 74.6G21K /system system/home 59.3G 74.6G 59.3G /home system/local-old 952M 74.6G 952M /system/local-old system/root 4G 77.1G 1.53G legacy system/scripts 20K 74.6G20K /usr/local/scripts system/tmp 31K 4.00G31K /tmp system/usr-local 396M 74.6G 324M /usr/local system/usr-obj1.85G 74.6G 1.65G /usr/obj system/usr-ports 193M 74.6G 185M /usr/ports system/usr-ports/distfiles8.53M 74.6G 8.53M /usr/ports/distfiles system/usr-src 499M 74.6G 303M /usr/src system/var1014M 74.6G 776M /var system/var/log 192M 74.6G 192M /var/log system/var/mysql 46.4M 74.6G 46.4M /var/db/mysql I did it like this as it is more like an opensolaris setup. If i wanted to say run a new os build I could say install it on a new zfs fs called say root_MMDD which would be a clone of the original root. I could then flip flop between these installations by resetinng the bootfs option of the pool ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS Boot Support from Installer
Tim Gustafson wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if there was a plan or time line in place to support ZFS boot > partitions in the installer. I Googled around a bit and found some how-to > documents for setting it up in a hacky kind of way, but the impression I got > is that support for ZFS partitions is coming to the installer in perhaps 7.3 > or 8.0, and I wanted to confirm or dispel that myth before I go forward using > the hacky method. > > Thanks! > > Tim Gustafson > Baskin School of Engineering > UC Santa Cruz > t...@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > Hello, I don't know about the "installer" but I believe the bootloader in 8.0 will (allready does) support booting from zfs. See links below for 8.0: http://lulf.geeknest.org/blog/freebsd/Setting_up_a_zfs-only_system/ for 7.x: http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSOnRoot I'd go for 8.0 if you whish to use an all zfs system. You might want to wait for the release version if you are affraid of the "hacking" method. Or you could try it in a Virtual Machine. Greetz, Mark signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ZFS Boot Support from Installer
Hi, I was wondering if there was a plan or time line in place to support ZFS boot partitions in the installer. I Googled around a bit and found some how-to documents for setting it up in a hacky kind of way, but the impression I got is that support for ZFS partitions is coming to the installer in perhaps 7.3 or 8.0, and I wanted to confirm or dispel that myth before I go forward using the hacky method. Thanks! Tim Gustafson Baskin School of Engineering UC Santa Cruz t...@soe.ucsc.edu 831-459-5354 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
