on 11/07/2010 15:54 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>on 11/07/2010 14:21 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk said the following:
>>
>> I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host)
>> and giving it raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to
>> configure as a raidz2 volume.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better or just as good to use fuse-zfs for such a
>> configuration? I/O from VirtualBox isn't really very good, but then, I
>> haven't tested the linux/fbsd configuration...
Like Freddie already mentioned, I'd heard that fuse-zfs wasn't really all that
good of an option, and I wanted something that was more stable/reliable.
>Hmm, an unexpected question IMHO - wouldn't it better to just install FreeBSD
on
>the hardware? :-)
>If an original poster is using Linux as a host OS, then probably he has some
>very good reason to do that. But performance and etc -wise, directly using
>FreeBSD, of course, should win over fuse-zfs. Right?
>
>[Installing and maintaining one OS instead of two is the first thing that comes
>to mind]
I'm going with a virtual machine because the box I ended up building for this
was way more powerful than I needed for just my file server; thus, I figured
I'd
use it as a personal machine too. (I wanted ECC RAM, and there just aren't
that
many motherboards that support ECC RAM that are also really cheap and
low-powered.) And since I'm much more comfortable with Linux, I wanted to use
it for the "personal" side of things.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
