3 ms·
I've used ZFS with mysql on both FreeBSD and Solaris (OpenIndiana specifically). The main problems I found with FreeBSD were not the ZFS implementation, but OOM
by Z99 14y ago
I've used ZFS with mysql on both FreeBSD and Solaris (OpenIndiana specifically). The main problems I found with FreeBSD were not the ZFS implementation, but OOM (out of memory) errors killing off processes (like sshd). Solaris, though extremely annoying to use, offered up a 2-5x performance increase over the same hardware running FreeBSD.
- bsg75 14y ago> Solaris, though extremely annoying to use You can't drop a comment like that without details!
- Z99 13y agoAnnoying things I found while implementing solaris (open indiana). All my opinion and may not reflect other peoples experiences. 1. Init > SMF - XML manifests instead of text configs? Very unnecessary. svcadmin took some getting used to, consulted the documentation frequently. 2. Packages - Many packages are available, however we ended up compiling most of our software. That inconvenience was one of the main reasons we left FreeBSD. 3. Chef - At the time there was very little we could do to automate these boxes in our infrastructure. 4. SSH keys in LDAP - I don't recall if we ever got this working. (LDAP tree in Zimbra) 5. ZFS Root - Required us to manually install the OS rather than having it provisioned 6. Learning curve - Though not a strong point if you're dropping a new OS you don't know that well in to a production environment things are bound to break. Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. But like I said earlier the performance increase was quite noticeable and worth it to the business.