Latest interface: 0.3.1
Latest system: 010
Pages: 1 2
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 27 March 2015 @ 00:57
My first post here!

I am trying to install/configure a new ZFS based NAS on a vanilla FreeBSD 10.1 installation. I found the following instructions for ZFSguru here:

http://zfsguru.com/doc/bsd/zfsguru

Is this still valid or are there any changes to it?

Thanks for your help!
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 27 March 2015 @ 01:59
Hi!

The document is outdated, but is still a good start. There might be some more things you need. The web-interface might error out with something it requires. My suggestion is to just try it.

But know that soon, ZFSguru can produce very frequent system releases and it is quite convenient to upgrade this way, especially because you can boot back into your previous installation should a problem arise with the new one.
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 27 March 2015 @ 02:14
Thanks CiPHER, I will post my experience here.
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 27 March 2015 @ 04:20edited 05:11 33s
I finished installing FreeBSD 10.1 from dvd, and I installed the following packages successfully:

sudo
bash
nano
screen

I have imported my old pool that I created while testing FreeNAS.

While installing some other tools that I use regularly, I noticed that the FreeBSD repository is not in sync with the version 10.1. Files in the following repository are newer: http://ftp2.za.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles/

I am trying to install the following programs.

mc
wget

How can I install these on FreeBSD? I really need wget, if there is alternative method that works too..


EDIT#1:

I am having similar issue while trying to install prerequisites for ZFSguru as well. While trying to install lighttpd, it says it cannot find http://distcache.FreeBSD.org/ports-distfiles/pkgconf-0.9.7.tar.bz2
The file in that location is pkgconf-0.9.8.tar.bz2. How do I configure the /usr/ports to use the latest from this repository?

EDIT#2:

I had an issue with DNS. After fixing that I issued the following commands to update. And now I can just "pkg install" instead of all the hard work!

# freebsd-update fetch
# freebsd-update install

EDIT#3:

Finally the real road block. The following file does not exist:
http://zfsguru.com/files/ZFSguru-0.1.6-script.tgz


Thanks!
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 27 March 2015 @ 06:00
Try this: http://bravo.zfsguru.com/interface/ZFSguru-0.2.0-beta10-webinterface.tgz
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 28 March 2015 @ 05:48
Ok.. I have installed the web package and got it running just fine.
While creating a new pool, there is an option for _modern_ or _reduced_ version, with options for SPA and ZPL. What are they and why should it be SPA=28?
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 28 March 2015 @ 11:06
SPA = pool version, usually 28 or 5000
ZPL = filesystem version, virtually always 5

Version 28 is the last version of ZFS that was shared by all platforms (Sun/Oracle/BSD/Linux). Version 5000 is the new 'feature flags' version. It adds some new features, such as LZ4 compression. The other features are less interesting though. Boot support for v5000 is not ubiquitous and not all platforms support v5000 pools and their features.

So v28 is a good compatibility choice. Plus, it is best to start low and enable the features you need. You can always upgrade (enable features) but can NEVER downgrade (disable features). Thus, a pool created on FreeBSD 11 will not be usable on lower versions, when enabling all features. That is why ZFSguru offers to reduce the number of features flags and/or ZFS version.
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 28 March 2015 @ 14:35edited 21:00 05s
Thanks CiPHER!

So a higher version of SPA means more features enabled. It is not version number of a software package per se. Am I correct?

I am thinking of building my actual NAS next week or so. Since importing the pool is pretty easy, I can always upgrade the system with a new motherboard/ECC ram etc later.

1. I will stick with SPA=28 and ZPL=5. Even with that, is there any risk of importing data pool to a new machine? Can there be any kind of mismatches because of possibly different configurations etc, that can go undetected immediately and that can potentially cause problems later?

2. Should I just go ahead and install the current version (0.2.0-beta10) of ZFSguru or wait for the next big release? Since I am installing ZFSguru on top of an independent full FreeBSD (separate boot disk), ZFSguru can be updated at will, am I correct?

3. The new ZFSguru will be based on FreeBSD 11, correct? So may be I should install 11.0-CURRENT as the base OS? Is that a stable release or development stream?

4. Is it possible to enable encryption on filesystem or folder level?

Looks like this thread is in the wrong category, please feel free to move it to another one that you think it might fit better.

Thanks again for spending your time to help others!
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 28 March 2015 @ 22:17edited 22:18 14s
ZFS versioning
SPA version is what is simply referred to as the ZFS version; version 28 is the last (open source) legacy version. Instead, it was decided to implement ZFS feature flags instead. This brings the ZFS version (SPA) to 5000 and it will stay there.

Now, features can be toggled on or off by using feature flags. This would be as simple as:

zfs set compression=lz4 tank/documents

This command enables LZ4 compression on the tank/documents filesystem. By enabling LZ4-compression, you also enable the LZ4 feature flag associated with it. The danger is, however, that you enable features that only some ZFS platforms support. If you want to downgrade to a lower version of the same product or switch ZFS platforms like going from ZFSguru to FreeNAS, then you might be out of luck. If the system does not support a feature that is enabled on the pool, it will not be importable and you cannot do anything with the pool. Some features do allow read-only support if not supported by the system.

In reality, this means that i highly advise to only enable features on the pool as you really need them. Some features are shared by all major ZFS platforms, like LZ4 compression - which is a cool feature by the way since its ultra fast. Having the pool as version 28 is virtually the same as version 5000 with all feature flags disabled. It is a good place to start. Remember: you can only upgrade, never downgrade ZFS versions!


1. risk of importing pool to new platform?
Solaris/SmartOS doesn't support the freebsd-zfs partition types that ZFSguru uses. But this can be rectified easily by changing the partition type to what Solaris likes.

Otherwise, pretty much you can switch platforms as long as the disk is detected by the OS and the ZFS version is compatible. It is possible however that a SAS/SATA controller is not supported on the other platform, but that is another story.


2. Should I just go ahead and install the current version (0.2.0-beta10) of ZFSguru or wait for the next big release? Since I am installing ZFSguru on top of an independent full FreeBSD (separate boot disk), ZFSguru can be updated at will, am I correct?
Yes you can use 0.2. I recommend you create the partitions with ZFSguru because it does everything just right. The ZFS pool will use GPT labels and you leave all options open for the future with perfect alignment as well.

Once you have the web-interface running, you should be able to install ZFSguru using official system images. You should not do that now, until the new version 0.3 comes out.


3. The new ZFSguru will be based on FreeBSD 11, correct? So may be I should install 11.0-CURRENT as the base OS? Is that a stable release or development stream?
ZFSguru is a derivative of FreeBSD. FreeBSD has versions 9.x, 10.x, 10-STABLE and 11-CURRENT. This list is respective to being from stable (left) to unstable (right). So 11-CURRENT is the active development version and frequently breaks things, which often get corrected in just minutes or hours or days but it should not be used for production systems.

ZFSguru has its own versions, but ZFSguru consists of three parts:
  • Web-interface (0.2, 0.3)
  • System image (10.0, 10.1, 11.0)
  • Services (addons)

This means that you update the web-interface independent of the system and independent of the (official) addons.

So the new web-interface 0.3 can be used with your current custom install. However, once 0.3 comes out, the weekly system image builds start, so it would be appealing to switch to the official builds instead of your custom installation. But you have the choice, of course!


4. Is it possible to enable encryption on filesystem or folder level?
Oracle has implemented things as such, but not in the open source OpenZFS. But what you can do is encrypt the disks underneath the pool. That is quite easy.

ZFSguru does not implement encryption in the web-interface yet, but it will in the future. Until then, you can use a simple script you execute whenever you wish to access the encrypted pool and enter your password.


Let me know about further questions!
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 29 March 2015 @ 00:20
Is 0.3 available for testing, so that I can get a glimpse? :-)
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 29 March 2015 @ 23:23
Not yet, but i can show you the Gnome3 desktop, if you want a glimpse. ;)

broken image
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 30 March 2015 @ 01:19edited 05:35 06s
CiPHER wrote: Not yet, but i can show you the Gnome3 desktop, if you want a glimpse. ;)


Common, you should post some screenshots of ZFSguru's new web interface.
I am a mint guy!
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 15:41
(hsn == harisn)

When I install FreeBSD my delete key does not work, it prints ~ instead. How do you fix that? Can this be due to a wrong keyboard layout selection?

CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 15:54
Is this a USB keyboard directly on the machine? Or using SSH login?
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 16:59
This happens at the terminal (PS/2 keyboard) as well as over SSH from Linux-Mint.
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 18:44
Does your keyboard use a regular US layout?
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 19:57edited 22:01 15s
I have already installed FreeBSD a few times for various reasons and I had this issue always. I always used the default (that is the first option on the list).

I just tried a fresh install of FreeBSD 10.1 again on a VM, and it has the same issue. BTW, the default keyboard layout is US. I am surprised no one else had this issue!

This was the solution:
http://daemonforums.org/showpost.php?p=13059&postcount=5

But you may have to do this for all users. I never see this sort of silly bugs in Linux.
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 22:12
You are not using Bourne shell but csh shell? That might explain it, since virtually everyone uses the Bourne (again) shell.

Bourne = /bin/sh
Bourne again = /usr/local/bin/bash (have to be installed from ports or packages)
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 31 March 2015 @ 23:29edited 23:44 11s
I usually use bash on Linux. Even though I have installed it on FreeBSD, I haven't switched to it yet. Just wanted to see if I could live with all default options. May be it's time!
harisn
User

14 posts

Posted on 1 April 2015 @ 02:11edited 06:32 57s
nm
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 1 April 2015 @ 15:44edited 16:11 59s
I see some difference in ZFS performance between Linux and FreeBSD.

Ubuntu 14.04.2 750-760 MB/s
FreeBSD 10.1 620-630 MB/s

Both are created with default settings in raid-0 native to the OS (basically created brand new not specifying any raid level) with 4k alignment. Why such a discrepancy?
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 1 April 2015 @ 21:10edited 21:11 40s
There are a lot of factors you are testing. Without knowing how you got those numbers, they also don't mean very much.

For example, it is easy to get buffered results; where part of the score is due to RAM instead of disk performance. You should test with 8* RAM.

Even then, many factors remain. If you want to do a proper comparison between ZoL performance and BSD performance, you will need to do a proper setup of at least 10 systems.

If all you want to know if why you got higher scores on your one system, you need to eliminate factors. It is not easy though if you want to do it proper. Benchmarking is very hard if you want to do it right. The trick is to adhere to the scientific principle of ceteris paribus meaning other factors being the same. So you changed one thing, and only one thing, so any difference in result will be attributed to that one thing.

But now, you test two platforms. So your hardware drivers will be different, kernel will be different, application (Samba) will be different, ZFS itself will be different, etc.

By the way; i am thinking of organising a benchmark marathon where ZFSguru users test their own systems across various platforms. That way, you get a global idea across many hardware systems and configurations. That might be worthwhile to compare the ZFS platforms (Solaris, BSD, Linux) with each other.
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 1 April 2015 @ 23:17edited 23:43 53s
>But now, you test two platforms. So your hardware drivers will be different, kernel will be
>different, application (Samba) will be different, ZFS itself will be different, etc.

That was the point. I was trying to find out which platform (with its built-in drivers and all that) would be faster out of the box, with similar configuration.

My tests were all on the very same hardware and BIOS settings. First I installed ZoL/Ubuntu and saved the bench results for comparison and then installed FreeBSD on another similar SSD (that was supposed to be my final install, to be put into regular use). Since I saw such a big difference I booted off the ZoL disk and ran the bench tests again. Now that I see ZoL is (much) faster for whatever reason, I am thinking of installing a fresh FreeBSD 10.1 to rule out any changes that I might have made and run clean tests once again.

I also wanted to test openindiana, but the installation did not go well!

All my tests were local to the server, dd creating zero filled files of 50GB each, that is only about 4times the RAM size. So far this produced pretty consistent results. May be I will create 100GB files in the next round of testing.

What parameters would you recommend that I should compare between two installations?

Thanks!
hsn
User

15 posts

Posted on 2 April 2015 @ 17:49
I have decided to continue using ZFS on Linux. FreeBSD would have been suitable if I were to release the software as a business.
CiPHER
Developer

1199 posts

Posted on 2 April 2015 @ 18:59
Alright. Wish you good luck! Make sure to keep the pool from enabling all features, so that you keep the option open of migrating your pool some day.
Next Page »

Valid XHTML 1.1