DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2009-02
DragonFly BSD
DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2009-02
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hammer or ZFS based backup, encryption

From: Bill Hacker <wbh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:45:53 +0800

Csaba Henk wrote:

I need to setup a backup machine, and I intend to utilize today's
snapshotty filesystems (which boils down to Dfly+Hammer or FBSD+ZFS --
btrfs is not there yet, and I don't feel like dwelving into Solaris).
Set up such an OS with such an fs, and backup by syncing to the
snapshotty fs and create a snapshot.

I wonder about the following things:

1) Any idea how does this approach scale related to more conventional solutions,
like rdiff-backup or dump(8)? I see the the pros, but are there any
cons? How effective is taking regular snapshots space-wise?

The advantage to snapshot-as-you-go is that it 'mostly' has just the rate-of-change to deal with - not the scanning or (external) DB'ifying of the whole mass of data. Easier to be near current if you don't have to keep digging through the big chunks to cope with a few bytes of change.

HAMMER has the advantage there in that it's basic structure is TID retentive. Downside is that reblock/prune are out-of-band operations.

ZFS, AFAICS, wants a great deal of RAM to work effectively with very large file systems. HAMMER seems *way* less greedy in that regard - OTOH, HAMMER really needs large *disks*.

2) Is there any practical argument for choosing between Dfly+Hammer and FBSD+ZFS? (Feel free to give biased answers :) )

Biased? 51 years into this game, I have no other kind....

On AMD-64, UtraSPARC, or Itanium, you can handle really large memory. On Intel lets-pretend-we-are-64-bit it is more challenging. Not that it is easy to find MB that support both anyway...

So ... IF I was to run ZFS, I'd probably bite the bullet and learn to put up with Solaris-on-SPARC, AND NOT Solaris on-Intel.

AFAICS, the FreeBSD port of ZFS has gotten quite good. But Solaris is where it ZFS was grown, and where it has the best 'fit' and integration, and the shortest list of out-of-step-with the rest-of-the-environment items. Acl's for example.

3) I'd like to encrypt stuff, either at device or fs level. For
FreeBSD there is geli(8). I haven't found anything for DragonFly.
Is there any way to get at it on DragonFly?


Any fan-in/fan-out fs environment should be able to interpose an encryption layer between VFS and media by use of a loopback or nullfs method.

'Should', 'in the ports', and 'proven not to break' are not synonymous.

Soon having to make a similar choice, (and still-yet looking at Gfarm, Gluster, DFarm, Ceph, Chiron et al..)

- ZFS doesn't offer anything I actually need - or at least, not at the 'price' it entails.

- HAMMER does. And resource-cheaply. Large HDD are way cheaper than large RAM once the switch to a powerful 64-bit CPU and associated MB to hold and use it effectively is factored in.

HAMMER, OTOH, seems quite happy with a VIA C7, and very modest RAM.

- I expect to 'settle' on DragonFlyBSD for the next set of production 'twins', accept (for now) roughly half the overall throughput FreeBSD could deliver, as we are network bandwidth and UPS-budget constrained anyway - not CPU or I/O bound.

But a DFLY choice is not *just* to have the hammerfs - but also because DFLY has more modern disk slicing and partitioning capability.



[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]