FreeNAS
freenas.org
freenas.org
2017: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14554232
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14107563
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13878283
2016: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12360478
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11367690
FreeNAS probably makes sense if you're an industry IT person and you want to make sure anyone in the future can figure out how to admin the thing. That's probably got a lot more value than I'm willing to admit, and I'm sure that's why it's popular, but I see a lot of posts about people trying to set up FreeNAS at home and it seems silly.
I now run SnapRAID [1] with mergerfs [2] and for my use, it's got many benefits over zfs and normal raid setups:
I could start from my existing volumes, without having to move any files.
I can use my random bunch of varying size disks purchased over several years, and add as needed. I tend to buy a new drive every couple years at whatever cheapest $/GB is, which means usually each drive is 2x the size of the last one I bought.
If something catastrophic fails like the system itself, the disks are just normal independent ext4 volumes - I can read them from basically anything. I've had to recover a RAID5 array using replacement hardware before, it's not fun and not something I want to ever have to do at home.
It seems to me you are mixing up what 'FreeNas mini' and 'FreeNAS Freebsd-based OS'.
I set up a 6 drive FreeNAS box in an old gaming computer I had around, just for the purpose of learning how it works. And out of love for BSD, of course. Not everything has to undergo a cost/benefit analysis, some like to play.
It was about this time that I decided to move over to a more consumer solution and bought a Synology. I liked the ideal of open source, self managed systems, but I got tired of being my own network admin, and IT.
I have rarely seen such a feature rich software. And all of it works pretty solid aswell.
- 2 bays so that I can run one big HD for storage and an SSD for software (backups in the cloud and on external drives)
- Intel CPU for best compatibility with software packages from third party sources and docker
- decent video playback support
I have had it for 1.5 years and haven't looked back. I don't run much on it other than Plex, torrents, syncthing and time machine backups. But it is so much better than my old laptop that I was using for all this before.
- start with the number of drive bays you’d like to have (Synology has a good calculator page you can use to figure out different configurations, if you wish to go that deep).
- the model year you’d prefer (newer, older, etc.). This is part of the model (like DSx17 is from 2017, DSy18 is from 2018).
- and if you prefer an Intel CPU or a non-x86/ARM CPU (this decides what kind of additional software you can find or run easily).
This is still a lot of work, but breaking it down helps.
I’ve been running freenas for years and have deployed/ran ZFS solutions as part of my job for a decade- this is the first I’m learning about that, it’s usually set and forget.
Am I just a bad admin?
According to FreeBSD's handbook[0], you only need to scrub the drives once a month, and check `zpool status` regularly.
[0] https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/zfs-zpool.html
My crontab:
# scrub
0 1 1,15 * * zpool scrub zroot
0 8 5,20 * * send_admin_email "zpool status" "$(zpool status)"It has been running on my home server for 5+ years now and it's a delight. It also supports ZFS through a plugin.
• "64-bit hardware is required for current FreeNAS releases. Intel processors are strongly recommended."
• "8 GB of RAM is the absolute minimum requirement. 1 GB per terabyte of storage is a standard starting point for calculating additional RAM needs, although actual needs vary. ECC RAM is strongly recommended."
The example configuration for a "Home Media Server or Small Office File Share" even suggests "16 GB RAM".
I've heard that ZFS is quite RAM hungry, but c'mon, 16GB for a home media server?
You can, and many people often do, run ZFS on a fraction of what FreeNAS recommends. In fact I’ve had ZFS running on a 32bot processor with 4GB RAM before. I’ve also had it running on 64bit with 2GB available RAM and it ran just fine for personal use.
However in fairness to FreeNAS, they are following best practices as defined by Sun/Oracle. It’s just those bear practices are defined with enterprise in mind.
I believe it did used to be the case that the FreeBSD port of ZFS had an issue where ZFS wouldn't always back off its RAM use fast enough, if the system came under memory presure, so it was at the time prudent to ensure that FreeBSD ZFS machines never got into low-memory situations, but I haven't heard anybody complain about that in practice in some years, so presumably it's fixed now, but FreeNAS's RAM recommendations have not been relaxed.
I've been running FreeBSD with zfs for many years. I'm unsure if it was the right decision, but I did learn a lot and it's been extremely stable after the initial setup :-)
It’s also interesting because of the current kerfuffle regarding the future of ZFS. For people who want to read up on that, this thread is quite interesting: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/freebsd-moving-to-zfs-on-...