Skip to main content
We’ve updated our Terms of Service. A new AI Addendum clarifies how Stack Overflow utilizes AI interactions.
Server Fault

Return to Answer

replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
Source Link
Community Bot
Community Bot
  • 1

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing (based on your usage of "mission critical" and "busy").

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendationsZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing (based on your usage of "mission critical" and "busy").

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing (based on your usage of "mission critical" and "busy").

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)

added 55 characters in body
Source Link
ewwhite
ewwhite
  • 201.6k
  • 94
  • 453
  • 825

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing (based on your usage of "mission critical" and "busy").

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing.

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing (based on your usage of "mission critical" and "busy").

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)

Source Link
ewwhite
ewwhite
  • 201.6k
  • 94
  • 453
  • 825

I'll address #3 here. I don't think VirtualBox+FreeBSD+ZFS is the best solution for what you're proposing.

  • What do you hope to accomplish by using ZFS? It's a great filesystem and I'm definitely an advocate, but what value does it add in this case? Snapshots? Checksumming? (personally, it took me several attempts and a lot of research before I began hosting critical applications on ZFS).

  • I understand that you're new to ZFS, but how's your experience with FreeBSD and VirtualBox?

  • Would there be any problem with running a single instance of the mail software and hosting multiple domains within, or do you need the complete isolation afforded by virtualization?

  • If you do choose to use ZFS, you don't want the traditional Perc RAID controllers, but should specify something that passes the RAW SAS drives to the operating system. See: ZFS SAS/SATA controller recommendations (BTW - your drives would still be hot-swappable.)