Re: [zfs-discuss] Fwd: ZFS for consumers WAS:Yager on ZFS
Paul Kraus wrote: I also like being able to see how much space I am using for each with a simple df rather than a du (that takes a while to run). I can also tune compression on a data type basis (no real point in trying to compress media files that are already compressed MPEG and JPEGs). That's a very good point. I do the same and as a side effect, my data has never been better organised. For a home user, data integrity is probably as, if not more, important than for a corporate user. How many home users do regular backups? Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Fwd: ZFS for consumers WAS:Yager on ZFS
For a home user, data integrity is probably as, if not more, important than for a corporate user. How many home users do regular backups? I'm a heavy computer user and probably passed the 500GB mark way before most other home users, did various stunts like running a RAID0 on IBM Deathstars, and I never back up. And I'm only running a ZFS mirror since a month or two, as insurance against disk failure (suddenly felt I needed to do this). What ZFS can give home users is safety for certain parts of their data, via checksums and ditto blocks. Doesn't prevent disk failure, but sure helps keeping important personal documents uncorrupted. -mg ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Fwd: ZFS for consumers WAS:Yager on ZFS
On 11/19/07, Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For a home user, data integrity is probably as, if not more, important than for a corporate user. How many home users do regular backups? Let me correct a point I made badly the first time around, I value the data integrity provided by mirroring (I have always used mirrored drives for data and OS on my home servers), I don't know how much the end-to-end checksumming buys me, but it is not a compelling feature. In other words, I didn't choose ZFS because of the end-to-end checksumming, I chose it for the ease of management and flexibility in configuration. The checksummed data is just a bonus that came along for the ride :-) Remember, this thread was essentially Why would a home user choose ZFS over other options... I tried using software mirrors under Linux ... maybe I was spoiled by Disk Suite / Solaris Volume Manager, but I found the Linux software mirrors clunky and unreliable (when installing the OS, the metadevices came up in one order, after booting off of the hard disk they came up in another order, leaving my mirrored root unmountable). I'm not a big fan of hardware RAID as I have seen terrible performance out of HW RAID cards and from the OS layer you need additional hardware vendor drivers to really manage and monitor the drives (if you even can from the OS layer, I hate rebooting, even home servers). Just one geeks opinion. -- Paul Kraus Albacon 2008 Facilities ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Fwd: ZFS for consumers WAS:Yager on ZFS
Sent from the correct address... -- Forwarded message -- From: Paul Kraus [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Nov 15, 2007 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS for consumers WAS:Yager on ZFS To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org On 11/15/07, can you guess? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... At home the biggest reason I went with ZFS for my data is ease of management. I split my data up based on what it is ... media (photos, movies, etc.), vendor stuff (software, datasheets, etc.), home directories, and other misc. data. This gives me a good way to control backups based on the data type. It's not immediately clear why simply segregating the different data types into different directory sub-trees wouldn't allow you to do pretty much the same thing. An old habit ... I think about backups along the lines of ufsdumps of entire filesystems, I know, an outdated model. I also like being able to see how much space I am using for each with a simple df rather than a du (that takes a while to run). I can also tune compression on a data type basis (no real point in trying to compress media files that are already compressed MPEG and JPEGs). -- Paul Kraus Albacon 2008 Facilities -- Paul Kraus Albacon 2008 Facilities ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
