01:57.10 | *** join/#gllug infobot (ibot@rikers.org) |
01:57.11 | *** topic/#gllug is Greater London LUG | Next Meet: TBD | http://www.gllug.org.uk |
07:12.50 | yaMatt | I'm using ZFS on my NAS, but it's running FreeBSD not Linux |
07:13.12 | yaMatt | Red Hat are switching to XFS I think |
07:13.24 | yaMatt | I think that's what my Fedora install is |
07:33.11 | *** join/#gllug hxy (~hxy@host81-134-44-16.in-addr.btopenworld.com) |
08:45.41 | *** join/#gllug ess_tee_u (~NULL@unaffiliated/ess-tee-u/x-83456671) |
10:02.49 | *** join/#gllug gregoriosw_vp (~gregorios@176.126.244.125) |
11:37.09 | ChoHag | wethrin: How does the experience differ between platforms? |
11:37.25 | ChoHag | I've installed all three but only used Linux in anger. |
11:38.41 | ChoHag | And verily there was much anger to behold. |
11:41.23 | ChoHag | The experience of ZFS, specifically. |
12:02.01 | vagarwal | yaMatt: i have been dealing with cloudera lately |
12:02.12 | vagarwal | a lot of their documentation is broken for RHEL7 |
12:03.59 | vagarwal | yaMatt: mach is a mozilla dev tool |
12:04.56 | vagarwal | speaking of ZFS, I have been tasked to build a PoC for fileshare |
12:05.29 | vagarwal | i have to use ibm x3650 with 4gb memory :/ |
12:07.30 | vagarwal | is it a good idea to use JBOB and setup RAIDZ2? |
12:30.29 | yaMatt | vagarwal, yeah, they've not quite sorted CentOS 7, they said so themselves, it's not officially supported, but their support guy said it should work and it did |
12:30.43 | yaMatt | kind of annoying though, how long as CentOS 7 been around? A few years? |
12:31.19 | yaMatt | But they seem more keen on officially supporting the most widely used OS, which is CentOS 6.x and Ubuntu 12.04 (iirc) |
12:32.25 | yaMatt | 4GB is not considered enough for ZFS, but for a PoC with no production data on it you could do it |
12:32.28 | yaMatt | I've run it on 2Gb |
12:56.09 | wethrin | ChoHag: It works nicely for me on all platforms |
12:56.28 | wethrin | More memory is better for ZFS |
14:51.06 | vagarwal | yaMatt: what did you use for RAID? |
14:51.29 | vagarwal | are you using a host raid controller or just jbod? |
14:51.40 | vagarwal | ^wethrin |
14:53.11 | vagarwal | i understand that raidz2 can be used instead of mdadm. just wondering if i should get rid of hardware raid all together |
15:02.10 | yaMatt | ZFS manages the RAID for you, to an extent, it works with pairs of disks and creates a kind of RAID10 on each pair |
15:02.29 | yaMatt | s/each/with |
15:02.42 | yaMatt | something like that |
15:04.18 | ChoHag | I don't see any particular advantage to zfs and raid, except to merchants. |
15:05.29 | ChoHag | I wouldn't even use jbod. Just give zfs direct access to each disc. |
15:05.33 | *** join/#gllug Leeds (~Leeds@n112118177182.netvigator.com) |
15:09.41 | yaMatt | agreed |
15:09.48 | yaMatt | which doesn't happen often between me and ChoHag XD |
15:11.06 | *** join/#gllug funkyHat_ (~m@funkyhat.org) |
15:14.23 | *** join/#gllug funkyHat (~m@funkyhat.org) |
15:14.29 | *** join/#gllug funkyHat_ (~m@funkyhat.org) |
15:16.11 | ChoHag | Well if you weren't wrong we could agree occasionally. |
15:16.55 | ChoHag | Like - ZFS doesn't have to *pair* discs. It can work with larger sets than 2. |
15:17.01 | ChoHag | And smaller, if you like to live dangerously. |
15:17.50 | ChoHag | However regardless of that, the rebuild mechinism is a lot safer in a zfs array than regular raid. |
15:27.33 | yaMatt | yeah, integrity checks and all sorts |
15:28.03 | yaMatt | you do have to think of ZFS quite differently to 'traditional' filesystems |
15:28.18 | yaMatt | can take a bit of getting used to |
15:40.19 | wethrin | vagarwal: jbod |
15:40.37 | wethrin | Well. Individual disks |
17:39.36 | ChoHag | You use jbod? Don't let the OS+ZFS handle each disc individually? |
22:57.05 | wethrin | Hm. I see jbod is terminology for getting some software wrapper around the physical disks |
22:57.13 | wethrin | Yes, ZFS goes on individual disks |
22:57.23 | wethrin | in fact, a bunch of individual disks... |
22:59.42 | *** join/#gllug Leeds (~Leeds@n112118177182.netvigator.com) |