4 ms·

Why not Raid 60 with Btrfs? It'll tolerate two disk loss with pro-active parity protection via btrfs and be faster and provide you with more disk space.

rbanffy 13y ago
They are running BSD. I don't think BtrFS is an option and ZFS can do pretty much every trick BtrFS can. The data corruption on the first machine seems like a hardware problem.
- KaiserPro 13y ago
  ZFS has inbuild raiding and much much friendlier tools. The BTRFS tools are like MDAM and lilo had a child.
barrkel 13y ago
Do you feel comfortable with reliability of btrfs? When I do a Google search, I want to see confirmed cases of fs lockups / data loss from fs bugs to be multiple years in the past. btrfs isn't there yet. I like btrfs's ability to e.g. switch raid levels without offlining the array. I think it's promising. But I wouldn't trust my data to it tomorrow.
KaiserPro 13y ago
Raid 60 is not really that good. the rebuild time of a raid 6 slice of 12 disks is 36 hours. (sas 3tb disks) Raid 10 is more expensive on space, but is the best compromise of traditional raid. LSI have some fancy magic virtual disk chunking mechanism to make rebuidling large raid 6 luns much quicker (4-8 hours)
duaneb 13y ago
Because BRTFS isn't even feature stable yet.
- jlgaddis 13y ago
  ... or supported on FreeBSD, which is what the server runs.
vacri 13y ago
For a home NAS intended to stream video, my experience is 'no, don't'. I ran btrfs on my home NAS (on mdadm RAID1), and playing video from it was awful - pausing every few minutes. I thought it was just my misconfiguration of samba, but a rebuild using xfs fixed it, and a friend having the same problems on a btrfs (no raid) home media server now make me gun-shy. I don't need the benefits btrfs has on my box, so I'll stick with xfs. I am very much not a filesystem expert, but my experience is that for me, btrfs is no benefits and significant problems.

rbanffy 13y ago

They are running BSD. I don't think BtrFS is an option and ZFS can do pretty much every trick BtrFS can. The data corruption on the first machine seems like a hardware problem.

KaiserPro 13y ago
ZFS has inbuild raiding and much much friendlier tools. The BTRFS tools are like MDAM and lilo had a child.

barrkel 13y ago

Do you feel comfortable with reliability of btrfs? When I do a Google search, I want to see confirmed cases of fs lockups / data loss from fs bugs to be multiple years in the past. btrfs isn't there yet. I like btrfs's ability to e.g. switch raid levels without offlining the array. I think it's promising. But I wouldn't trust my data to it tomorrow.

KaiserPro 13y ago

Raid 60 is not really that good. the rebuild time of a raid 6 slice of 12 disks is 36 hours. (sas 3tb disks) Raid 10 is more expensive on space, but is the best compromise of traditional raid. LSI have some fancy magic virtual disk chunking mechanism to make rebuidling large raid 6 luns much quicker (4-8 hours)

duaneb 13y ago

Because BRTFS isn't even feature stable yet.

jlgaddis 13y ago
... or supported on FreeBSD, which is what the server runs.

vacri 13y ago

For a home NAS intended to stream video, my experience is 'no, don't'. I ran btrfs on my home NAS (on mdadm RAID1), and playing video from it was awful - pausing every few minutes. I thought it was just my misconfiguration of samba, but a rebuild using xfs fixed it, and a friend having the same problems on a btrfs (no raid) home media server now make me gun-shy. I don't need the benefits btrfs has on my box, so I'll stick with xfs. I am very much not a filesystem expert, but my experience is that for me, btrfs is no benefits and significant problems.