Re: [pfSense] ZFS on 2.4.2
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Walter Parker wrote: > Are the FreeBSD 10.2 instructions ( > https://www.netgate.com/docs/platforms/rcc-dff-2220/freebsd.html) still > valid for 11.1? > > >- Connect the console cable (I have that setup) >- Boot from from a memstick image plugged into the USB port >- From the Menu select 3, Escape to the loader prompt >- Enter the following commands > - set comconsole_port=0x2F8 > - set comconsole_speed=38400 > - set hint.uart.0.flags=0x0 > - set hint.uart.1.flags=0x10 > - set console=comconsole > - boot >- Select shell or LiveCD from the FreeBSD installer menu >- Run tunefs > > Or does the 2.4 memstick installer give one an escape to shell option? > The hint lines for uart flags are unnecessary but harmless since FreeBSD 10. The image does have a "live" mode where it runs entirely in ramdisk, but nothing will let you set the serial port to the second port. You will have to use these settings to use the second port. You could try just booting to single user mode and run the tunefs. I don't remember if that works or not for the boot volume with FreeBSD 11. ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] ZFS on 2.4.2
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Vick Khera wrote: > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Zandr Milewski > wrote: > > > As someone who has spent easily 100 hours troubleshooting, rebuilding, > and > > restoring UFS based Netgate boxes that have to function in environments > > with less-that-datacenter grade power availability, I'll take "potential > > corruption in corner cases" over "1 in 4 chance it won't come back from a > > power cycle" > > > > *Any* journaled filesystem is an improvement. > > > > Journaling on UFS is just one setting away. Boot single user from USB, then > run "tunefs -j enable /dev/da0" for your boot device da0. Done. I don't > know why FreeBSD does not recommend this for the boot volume, but I think > as long as you never fill up the disk you're ok. I've no had issues with > it. > __ > That is an interesting idea. As I bought mine directly from the hardware store, I don't install pfSense myself. I've never booted it from USB. As this system doesn't have VGA, I may not be able to use a standard FreeBSD image out of the box. Are the FreeBSD 10.2 instructions ( https://www.netgate.com/docs/platforms/rcc-dff-2220/freebsd.html) still valid for 11.1? - Connect the console cable (I have that setup) - Boot from from a memstick image plugged into the USB port - From the Menu select 3, Escape to the loader prompt - Enter the following commands - set comconsole_port=0x2F8 - set comconsole_speed=38400 - set hint.uart.0.flags=0x0 - set hint.uart.1.flags=0x10 - set console=comconsole - boot - Select shell or LiveCD from the FreeBSD installer menu - Run tunefs Or does the 2.4 memstick installer give one an escape to shell option? Walter > _ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > -- The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] ZFS on 2.4.2
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Zandr Milewski wrote: > As someone who has spent easily 100 hours troubleshooting, rebuilding, and > restoring UFS based Netgate boxes that have to function in environments > with less-that-datacenter grade power availability, I'll take "potential > corruption in corner cases" over "1 in 4 chance it won't come back from a > power cycle" > > *Any* journaled filesystem is an improvement. > Journaling on UFS is just one setting away. Boot single user from USB, then run "tunefs -j enable /dev/da0" for your boot device da0. Done. I don't know why FreeBSD does not recommend this for the boot volume, but I think as long as you never fill up the disk you're ok. I've no had issues with it. ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] ZFS on 2.4.2
As someone who has spent easily 100 hours troubleshooting, rebuilding, and restoring UFS based Netgate boxes that have to function in environments with less-that-datacenter grade power availability, I'll take "potential corruption in corner cases" over "1 in 4 chance it won't come back from a power cycle" *Any* journaled filesystem is an improvement. On 3/8/18 06:19, Vick Khera wrote: On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:18 PM, Walter Parker wrote: don't use ECC. Can anyone show why my solution should switch file systems (given that I'm keeping my existing hardware) without changing the subject? I've read many of the scare stories from FreeNAS and they all seem to end up as a call to authority or a "fine, risk your data" without actually answering the question. The most important feature I use in ZFS is the snapshots. Combined cleverly with datasets and quotas, they make for very easy management of disk resources when needed. The FreeNAS model of boot environments is awesome, and I hope pfSense takes those up as well. It makes upgrades less stressful when you can just click a button to revert. As for the ECC, see this study https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//pubs/archive/35162.pdf for example. It is slightly old, but RAM hardware is not that much advanced since then. Basically, if you have a few gigs of RAM in your machine, it *will* produce bit errors. There are other studies that back this up too, and they are more recent. Personally, I don't understand why any computer, desktop or server, made these days is without ECC. My desktop has 16GB RAM with room for 16 more. I'm sure there are flipped bits in some of my work somewhere, but I'll never really know. If I'm lucky, the flipped bits are on unused sections of code loaded from the disk into RAM. ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
Re: [pfSense] ZFS on 2.4.2
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:18 PM, Walter Parker wrote: > don't use ECC. Can anyone show why my solution should switch file systems > (given that I'm keeping my existing hardware) without changing the subject? > I've read many of the scare stories from FreeNAS and they all seem to end > up as a call to authority or a "fine, risk your data" without actually > answering the question. > > The most important feature I use in ZFS is the snapshots. Combined cleverly with datasets and quotas, they make for very easy management of disk resources when needed. The FreeNAS model of boot environments is awesome, and I hope pfSense takes those up as well. It makes upgrades less stressful when you can just click a button to revert. As for the ECC, see this study https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//pubs/archive/35162.pdf for example. It is slightly old, but RAM hardware is not that much advanced since then. Basically, if you have a few gigs of RAM in your machine, it *will* produce bit errors. There are other studies that back this up too, and they are more recent. Personally, I don't understand why any computer, desktop or server, made these days is without ECC. My desktop has 16GB RAM with room for 16 more. I'm sure there are flipped bits in some of my work somewhere, but I'll never really know. If I'm lucky, the flipped bits are on unused sections of code loaded from the disk into RAM. ___ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
