Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Next Android To Enable Local Encryption By Default Too, Says Google

zeigerpuppy If you believe this (126 comments)

You need your head read. Google has shown time and again that it does not care about your security. There is no need to trade off convenience for security in cloud backup. Encrypt locally and send the data encrypted to backup. This would be great but i bet that Google also holds they keys and decrypts on their end. Google says it wouldn't be able to use your data for their massive data mining and information theft machine if it were properly encrypted. This is why the data sits on their servers unprotected by encryption, they are the antithesis of your guardians of security. If you value your data, turn off all Google services and manage your own backups.

about a month ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Unfamiliar (370 comments)

Actually it has 32GB of reg ECC RAM but that's not all for ZFS!

about a month ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Time Slider (370 comments)

It's not too hard to do with a script. My snapshots are daily and they rotate every month leaving the first of every month as a longer term backup. It's granular enough for my data but hourly or even every minute would work fine too.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Technobabble... (370 comments)

The recommendations vary a lot, mostly because it also depends on whether you're accessing a subset of your files more frequently than others. 1Gb per Tb seems good for most loads but ZFS will use as much as you throw at it.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Unfamiliar (370 comments)

You explained that so much better than I did!

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Little Baby Linux (370 comments)

Except FreeBSD can't do Xen + ZFS. BSD is good for a lot of things and so is Linux. A good sysadmin picks the right tool for the job. I'd like to think the BSD project benefits from more people using ZFS.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Magic (370 comments)

Have another look at the docs, you can upgrade capacity one disk at a time but, of course, throughput suffers because you now have asymmetric storage. You can also change level to some degree by grouping sets (eg turning a mirror into a stripped mirror)

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Working well for me (370 comments)

But isn't that the whole point, ZFS is designed to avoid the most common failure modes but it relies on reducing the errors in the data it is using for check summing. Thats why ECC is important, RAM errors are the 2nd most common bit flip error and if that's your comparator, it needs to be accurate.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: no support for posix acls (370 comments)

You could still use ZVOLs. I use ext4 on top of ZFS for some virtual machines. If you make sure to use the same block size in both the performance hit is small (approx 10%) and you will have ext4 with proper check summing and snapshot capabilities under it.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Unfamiliar (370 comments)

Because ZFS allows you to flexibly allocate, administer, snapshot and backup data in a coherent way. You can even use other file system on top of it if you want (zvols). Hardware level checksumming on drives is not aware of your file structure and a look at SMART info on a drive will reveal quite a few Unrecovered errors (density is a bitch). So I wouldn't rely on your drive to correct it's own errors.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Ready for primetime... (370 comments)

You're talking about different levels. I use a zpool on SSDs for my databases AND give the databases lots of RAM. The two are not mutually exclusive but if course your RAM should be utilised as close to your query as possible to increase throughput. ZFS is for integrity first, squeezing speed out of it is certainly possible but not it's primary purpose.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Completely Broken (At least for me) (370 comments)

ZFS-fuse is not ZFSonLinux! It uses an older version and is much buggier. Also which HDD controller are you using? This really matters cos ZFS should be talking to your drives directly and bad controllers sometimes do nasty things.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Unfamiliar (370 comments)

Actually it's pretty friendly on resources but likes lots of RAM to perform well (1Gb per Tb of storage is a good minimum). One of my servers runs on an atom processor (8x 3TB drives in equivalent to RAID 6 gets throughput of about 200MB/sec) Adding disks is also a strength. You can grow data sets quite easily but naturally performance degrades until you update the whole drive set. A lot of RAID controllers can be put in HDA mode so you may be lucky. However the Adaptec controllers go cheap 2nd hand ($100).

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Working well for me (370 comments)

One should also use SSDs with capacitors if they are backing a ZIL but the only things that are absolutely essential are decent HDD controllers (I've had good results with Adaptec SAS controllers, even using a mixed SAS/SATA drive set on separate channels)

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Working well for me (370 comments)

The technical descriptions I've read say that you absolutely should use ECC because ZFS will eventually hit a checksum mismatch. This could result in valid data being flagged as corrupt. ECC RAM is not much more expensive these days but you do need a mobo that supports it.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Re: Unfamiliar (370 comments)

ZFS is a layer below LVM. It's best to give it direct control over your drives (no hardware RAID). The reason for this is to allow it to do data integrity checks on the actual data being written. It's similarly fast compared to hardware RAID but guarantees data integrity in a much more compete fashion. I use a striped mirrored setup which is similar to RAID 10 (over 4x 3TB drives with caches on a pair of SSDs). If you cache like this, frequent reads don't need to go to the spindles. It also had built in compression and deduplication. The best thing IMO is instant snapshots though, that's one feature I can't believe I lived without.

about a month and a half ago
top

The State of ZFS On Linux

zeigerpuppy Working well for me (370 comments)

I've been using ZFSonLinux for a year in production. No problems at all. It's my storage back end for Xen Virtual machines. Just make sure you use ECC RAM and a decent hard disk controller. Instant snapshots and ZFS send/receive functions are awesome, have reduced my backup times by an order of magnitude. I use a Debian Wheezy/Unstable hybrid.

about a month and a half ago
top

Ask Slashdot: Life Beyond the WRT54G Series?

zeigerpuppy Re:Linksys E1200 (427 comments)

me too, another vote for the E3000

about 2 months ago

Submissions

top

Ask Slashdot: Best way to implement Wave protocol self hosted?

zeigerpuppy zeigerpuppy writes  |  about 10 months ago

zeigerpuppy (607730) writes "It's time to revisit Wave, or is it? I have been looking to implement a Wave installation on my server for private group collaboration. However, all evolutions of Wave seem to be closed-source or experiencing minimal development. I was excited about Kune, but its development looks stalled and despite Rizzoma claiming to be Open-Source, their code is nowhere to be found! Wave-in-a-box looks dead. So Slashdotters, do any of you have a working self-hosted wave implementation?"
Link to Original Source

Journals

zeigerpuppy has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?