@tjatwood109 said in ZFS is Perfectly Safe on Hardware RAID:

@scottalanmiller

Thanks - I will proceed without using ZFS - I prefer hardware RAID.

Tim

ZFS is perfectly fine with hardware RAID, if you like ZFS' features otherwise (like zsend is nice) then there's no reason to avoid it. If you don't plan to use any unique features, then XFS is my "go to" choice by default. Very fast, very stable.

It was amazing that Scott found it so fast. I was on the Windows side of things. Inside Windows they were using the iSCSI initiator to connect to the FreeNAS. All the sudden Windows would just log a ton of iSCSI events and go down.

I looked up the events and most people resolved them by putting the iSCSI traffic on a separate NIC. This happened two days in a row at about the same time each day. I was looking at snapshot, backup, etc times when Scott found it in the FreeNAS logs.

@dafyre said in Can You Install FreeNAS to a Single RAID 6 RAIDZ2 Array:

Who are you and what have you done with @scottalanmiller ... Actually using FreeNAS for something?

I was just about to say the same thing. Or maybe his account was hacked.

SysAdm™ Remote Management

SysAdm™ provides a new way to manage your Server, Desktop or Cloud-based systems. By exposing an API via encrypted REST or WebSockets, it is now possible to remotely control all aspects of your machine, including management of software, updates, boot environments, users, backups, and more. SysAdm™ is the answer for companies looking for a low cost, yet scalable solution that easily manages different segments of IT infrastructure to keep things running smoothly. TrueOS® has now embedded all local and remote control panel functionality into SysAdm™ so you can easily find and adjust any configurable system element from one place.

@marcinozga Thanks, but already tried net.inet.ip.fastforwarding in all combinations with TCP and UDP.

@BBigford said in Installing FreeNAS 9.3 on Scale HC3:

When you say "in a business capacity"... Do you mean any business or just certain sizes? What is the reasoning? I know you think the FreeNAS community can be very brash/vile at times based on some of your earlier posts to people asking about FN.

http://www.smbitjournal.com/2015/07/the-jurassic-park-effect/

Basically you are getting a highly stateful system where support is critical but in a crippled manner compared to just using FreeBSD. You are getting something easy to set up but difficult to support. If anything goes wrong you are in very tough shape. And updates come a bit behind. So you have a number of small issues that all add up to a not very business friendly product.

zroot is #1 reason to love ZFS !!

Updated our slave database servers to 10.3 a couple of weeks ago... we roll out phases since we've got so many damn servers. It's always a nightmare. If no issues for the next couple of weeks or additional patches, we'll roll out to primary database servers (they're all sets of master-master, the slaves are for search primarily, but also are useful for a live test if everything passes staging, and they're a hot backup too if any issues arise) and then web servers. We never go down so it's a painfully slow process.

@KOOLER already tested vanilla FreeBSD 🙂

In many ways that is where Linux shines.... fewer apps.

And yes, great for containers.

Looping back to this, in the past month I've worked with three different companies that all experienced significant data loss or downtime because of their choice of FreeNAS. Two suffered from not having front loaded their engineering and had an inability to support their servers during routine operations and caused major outages because of it along with significant cost for repairs, and one company that lost its data because of unnecessary bugs in the FreeNAS GUI code that would have been avoided has they been simply on FreeBSD.

Additionally this past week FreeNAS 10 "Coral" was demonstrated to be so incredibly unstable a month after being released that they had to recall the release and revert to a "beta" status indefinitely. For a trivial end user application this would be bad, for a critical storage infrastructure component on which companies need to have rock solid faith, it's unthinkable.

It's just that Windows Phone and Windows RT have merged and that's where that codebase has gone. It's real Windows now, from my understanding.

@matteo-nunziati said in Open Storage Operating Systems for SAM-SD:

what a mess...

Windows desktops are loaded with software that you are only limited as to how you can use it by EULA as well.