On 10/13/2018 11:22 AM, Adam Jensen wrote:
> On 10/12/2018 11:09 PM, ~Stack~ wrote:
>> For all the arguments of performance, well I wouldn't use either XFS or
>> EXT4. I use ZFS and Ceph on the systems I want performance out of.
> 
> For a single, modest server that runs everything - email, web, DBMS,
> etc. - I've recently switched from FreeBSD-11.2 with a four disk ZFS
> RAID-10 to SL-7.5 with XFS on a four disk hardware RAID-5. While ZFS was
> very convenient and had a lot of nifty capabilities, the resource
> consumption was enormous and performance didn't seem to be as good as it
> is now. (E3-1245, 32GB RAM, MR9266-4i)
> 

We do a pool of mirrored disks with fast SSD's for our ZFS caching.
Performance is fantastic and, as I mentioned in another reply, the
rebuild time of a failed drive (or a resilvering when I upgraded all of
the drives on the fly without downtime) is way faster than any RAID I've
ever worked on before (which is quite a few in my career).

However, even if performance wasn't great we would still probably be
using it because of the tooling around ZFS. We utilize a lot of the
tools it provides for shared file-systems, backups, compression,
de-dupe, ect.

Never used ZFS on *BSD. I've only used it on SL7 so I can't say anything
about an OS difference.

~Stack~