4 ms·
Honestly not bad. About 7 years of use on personal machine, single volume. It simpler than ZFS and allows cheap incremental backups with send/receive. One year
by Piezoid 7y ago
Honestly not bad. About 7 years of use on personal machine, single volume. It simpler than ZFS and allows cheap incremental backups with send/receive.
One year ago I built a RAID56 with 5 used 2TB drives from eBay. Risky move, but it went smoothly so far. It's only for home storage and important stuff is backuped off site anyway.
One Seagate drive died with lots a bad sectors. The replace command took really long even with the "-r" flag (don't read from replaced drive, in theory), so I ended up unplugging the drive and rebalancing from there.
I have high hopes for bcachefs. We have a real need for a modern FS with tiered caches. I backed the project but I don't have the skills or time to help.
- brokenkebab 7y agoZFS allows cheap inc backups with send/receive.
- Piezoid 7y agoYes, I'm aware of that. Sorry, bad wording. I choose btrfs because it's simpler to setup. It is also lighter on memory for uses on personal machines. I know ZFS can work with less memory but at a performance disadvantage.
- brokenkebab 7y agoI found the need for a plenty of RAM a little overblown for ZFS. My anecdotal experience: I repaired my home file server replacing faulty RAM with 2G stick (because that was only spare piece I had) as a temporary solution. But as it often happens with temporary solutions it lasted longer, for slightly less then two years. Prefetch feature was automatically disabled, but there were no delays which my perception can register. I suppose speed degradation would be visible on heavy-lifting server, but exactly for personal use one doesn't need any special amount of RAM.