Mailing List Archive

1 2 3 4 5  View All
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 8:01 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
> I think I'm going to switch. I need to start over anyway. I set up a
user account and a large pool but while I can mount it, I can't put
anything in it yet. I get a permission error. I likely missed a step or
something. Starting over will help correct that. lol
>
> By the way, when I got it installed, it did update to a newer version. I
didn't look to see if it was dated in any way but updates seem to be
available for FreeNAS. I dunno.
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)

At this point I think you're wise to just plug around in it for a little
while. Learn it a little bit. Build a few pools and get used to how it
works. It's a bit different than Linux.

In my case everything is NFS mounts and NFS exports work differently on
BSD. Assume you have a pool:

/mnt/MyPool/mark/Backups

and under that you want to have 3 directories exported to different
machines for backups, so

/mnt/MyPool/mark/Backups/science
/mnt/MyPool/mark/Backups/sciene2
/mnt/MyPool/mark/Backups/StellarMate

where each user machine has a place to put things, and hence you can find
it, but no LVM, it's just a big pool of storage. Note there are all the
standard problems about permissions when you first set these directories
up, like making sure you own them, that they are writable, etc.

In Linux NFS I would likely export all three separately, while in TrueNAS
BSD I export

/mnt/MyPool/mark --alldirs

If you cared about science mucking with science2's backups there are ways
to stop that, but I don't care because each machine on my network has a
bash scripts that points it where I want it to go:

mark@science2:~$ cat ./bin/DoTrueNAS
#rsync -avx -n --port=873
--exclude={000_NOT_BACKED_UP,RIPS,.cache,.nv,'google-chrome*',DiskImages,Current}
/home/mark mark@truenas1:/mnt/MyPool/mark/Backups/science2/.

rsync -avx --port=873
--exclude={000_NOT_BACKED_UP,RIPS,.cache,.nv,'google-chrome*',DiskImages,Current}
/home/mark mark@truenas1:/mnt/MyPool/mark/Backups/science2/.
mark@science2:~$

where the first one is a test config and the second is a real transfer.
Because it's rsync if something doesn't finish then I can pick up again
with little time lost.

Also, I think there are ways for you to build complex pools like a RAID0
from your 6TB and 8TB drives, and then a RAID1 using the RAID0 and your
14TB drive but I've never tried it because mine don't have enough drive
slots for that.

Also, turn on compression. It saves me between 15-20% so 14TB becomes 16TB
storage. YMMV. Video files don't compress, at least not much. Data files
generally do.

Hope this helps. I think you'll find TrueNAS fun actually but there is a
learning curve. I've used it for about a year and barely scratched the
surface.

Good luck,
Mark
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Am Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 08:44:42AM -0700 schrieb Mark Knecht:

> Also, I think there are ways for you to build complex pools like a RAID0
> from your 6TB and 8TB drives, and then a RAID1 using the RAID0 and your
> 14TB drive but I've never tried it because mine don't have enough drive
> slots for that.

After a longer fruitless search on the interwebs (I ddidn’t want to start up
my NAS just to check this) I finally found the right search keywords and
found a reddit thread about that. And it even throws LVM into the
discussion. ^^
https://www.reddit.com/r/zfs/comments/fitc73/raidz_with_nested_vdevs/

Also <https://zfs-discuss.zfsonlinux.narkive.com/g2THW8n4/nested-vdevs>:
“Here's a definitive answer from the man page for zpool.

Virtual devices cannot be nested, so a mirror or raidz virtual device can
only contain files or disks. Mirrors of mirrors (or other combinations) are
not allowed.”


I would advise against a JBOD pool anyways. Because if one drive dies, the
whole JBOD is gone. That goes for ZFS and probably for LVM, too (though I am
not sure how writes are distributed across JBOD disks). If the goal is
redundancy, you could buy a second drive to match the size of an existing
one and build a mirror. If redundancy is not a goal, then use the drives
separately like you do now. If one fails, then only its content is gone (or
even just the files sitting on the broken sector).

> Also, turn on compression. It saves me between 15-20% so 14TB becomes 16TB
> storage. YMMV. Video files don't compress, at least not much. Data files
> generally do.

It doesn’t hurt to switch it on, especially with lzo. But with video, the
benefit will be negligible. When storing a block of data (a “record” in ZFS
speak), it is passed through the compressor and only if the compression gain
is above a given threshold (10 % methinks), the block is written to disk
with compression.

What is more relevant in filesystems for big files (i.e. videos): set the
record size to 1 MB. The default is 64 kB, IIRC. Each record requires one
block of metadata (which includes the record checksum). So bigger records ?
fewer meta blocks ? better storage efficiency.

If you use big records for small files, then efficiency goes down a little.
It’s a similar (but a little more complicated) principle as when you write a
100 byte text file to a file system that uses 4 kB clusters. That file will
still use up 4 kB on disk.

The record size can be set per-dataset. So in your pool you could create a
dataset with a smaller record size for office documents, images and music,
and another dataset just for videos.

> Hope this helps. I think you'll find TrueNAS fun actually but there is a
> learning curve. I've used it for about a year and barely scratched the
> surface.

The main reason for me why I would wanna use it as opposed to a standard
Gentoo install: the OOTB web interface to manage all sorts of accounts,
access and permissions under one nice hood.

--

Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

A fermata comes to the doctor: “I can’t hold it any longer...”
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> Am Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 08:44:42AM -0700 schrieb Mark Knecht:
>
>> Also, I think there are ways for you to build complex pools like a RAID0
>> from your 6TB and 8TB drives, and then a RAID1 using the RAID0 and your
>> 14TB drive but I've never tried it because mine don't have enough drive
>> slots for that.
> After a longer fruitless search on the interwebs (I ddidn’t want to start up
> my NAS just to check this) I finally found the right search keywords and
> found a reddit thread about that. And it even throws LVM into the
> discussion. ^^
> https://www.reddit.com/r/zfs/comments/fitc73/raidz_with_nested_vdevs/
>
> Also <https://zfs-discuss.zfsonlinux.narkive.com/g2THW8n4/nested-vdevs>:
> “Here's a definitive answer from the man page for zpool.
>
> Virtual devices cannot be nested, so a mirror or raidz virtual device can
> only contain files or disks. Mirrors of mirrors (or other combinations) are
> not allowed.”
>
>
> I would advise against a JBOD pool anyways. Because if one drive dies, the
> whole JBOD is gone. That goes for ZFS and probably for LVM, too (though I am
> not sure how writes are distributed across JBOD disks). If the goal is
> redundancy, you could buy a second drive to match the size of an existing
> one and build a mirror. If redundancy is not a goal, then use the drives
> separately like you do now. If one fails, then only its content is gone (or
> even just the files sitting on the broken sector).
>
>> Also, turn on compression. It saves me between 15-20% so 14TB becomes 16TB
>> storage. YMMV. Video files don't compress, at least not much. Data files
>> generally do.
> It doesn’t hurt to switch it on, especially with lzo. But with video, the
> benefit will be negligible. When storing a block of data (a “record” in ZFS
> speak), it is passed through the compressor and only if the compression gain
> is above a given threshold (10 % methinks), the block is written to disk
> with compression.
>
> What is more relevant in filesystems for big files (i.e. videos): set the
> record size to 1 MB. The default is 64 kB, IIRC. Each record requires one
> block of metadata (which includes the record checksum). So bigger records ?
> fewer meta blocks ? better storage efficiency.
>
> If you use big records for small files, then efficiency goes down a little.
> It’s a similar (but a little more complicated) principle as when you write a
> 100 byte text file to a file system that uses 4 kB clusters. That file will
> still use up 4 kB on disk.
>
> The record size can be set per-dataset. So in your pool you could create a
> dataset with a smaller record size for office documents, images and music,
> and another dataset just for videos.
>
>> Hope this helps. I think you'll find TrueNAS fun actually but there is a
>> learning curve. I've used it for about a year and barely scratched the
>> surface.
> The main reason for me why I would wanna use it as opposed to a standard
> Gentoo install: the OOTB web interface to manage all sorts of accounts,
> access and permissions under one nice hood.
>


Interesting info.  Since this is a duplicate copy already, I'm not to
worried about RAID stuff.  I'd rather have two separate backups myself. 
Store them in different places for even more safety.  Still, one of
these days.  ;-) 

I'm still getting this error. 

root@fireball ~ # mkdir /mnt/Backup/Videos
mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/mnt/Backup/Videos’: Permission denied
root@fireball ~ #

I've tried every permission in every place I can find.  I have a user
set up, set permissions under storage and pools, all the little
directory thingys under it too.  It mounts so I'd think I got everything
set up correctly in the Share section.  I actually followed a guide and
I don't think I missed anything.  Still, I can't write anything to the
thing.  It mounts fine, even shows it is mounted rw.  I can't find
anything wrong on the puter or NAS ends.  This reminds me of the last
time I played with BSD.  It works so different, it just throws a person
upside down and shakes them. 

I did switch to TrueNAS tho.  Thing is, I got the same result from both,
exact same error.  Can't be a bug.  It has to be me.  No idea what I
missed but I bet I did.  lol  Just gonna keep banging on it.  :-D  I do
like the GUI part.  That's pretty neat. 

Dale

:-) :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Dale wrote:
>
> Interesting info.  Since this is a duplicate copy already, I'm not to
> worried about RAID stuff.  I'd rather have two separate backups myself. 
> Store them in different places for even more safety.  Still, one of
> these days.  ;-) 
>
> I'm still getting this error. 
>
> root@fireball ~ # mkdir /mnt/Backup/Videos
> mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/mnt/Backup/Videos’: Permission denied
> root@fireball ~ #
>
> I've tried every permission in every place I can find.  I have a user
> set up, set permissions under storage and pools, all the little
> directory thingys under it too.  It mounts so I'd think I got everything
> set up correctly in the Share section.  I actually followed a guide and
> I don't think I missed anything.  Still, I can't write anything to the
> thing.  It mounts fine, even shows it is mounted rw.  I can't find
> anything wrong on the puter or NAS ends.  This reminds me of the last
> time I played with BSD.  It works so different, it just throws a person
> upside down and shakes them. 
>
> I did switch to TrueNAS tho.  Thing is, I got the same result from both,
> exact same error.  Can't be a bug.  It has to be me.  No idea what I
> missed but I bet I did.  lol  Just gonna keep banging on it.  :-D  I do
> like the GUI part.  That's pretty neat. 
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-) 
>


Update.  I thought about just using Dolphin to play with the directory
that's actually on the NAS.  I could create folders and files just fine
with Dolphin.  Well, isn't that interesting.  Finally I found a comment
with google that gave me a clue.  I needed to change the options I use
with rsync plus it appears on my computer, I need to su to dale, same
user as on NAS.  Now it works.  I can rsync my files over. 

Then I noticed something else.  The network card in the NAS box, it's a
old 100MB card.  Has anyone ever poured cold molasses before?  Does
waiting on leap year sound familiar?  ROFL  Just saying. 

Hey, at least I got the silly thing to work, slowly, but works.  :/

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 6:55 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dale wrote:
> >
> > Interesting info. Since this is a duplicate copy already, I'm not to
> > worried about RAID stuff. I'd rather have two separate backups myself.
> > Store them in different places for even more safety. Still, one of
> > these days. ;-)
> >
> > I'm still getting this error.
> >
> > root@fireball ~ # mkdir /mnt/Backup/Videos
> > mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/mnt/Backup/Videos’: Permission denied
> > root@fireball ~ #
> >
> > I've tried every permission in every place I can find. I have a user
> > set up, set permissions under storage and pools, all the little
> > directory thingys under it too. It mounts so I'd think I got everything
> > set up correctly in the Share section. I actually followed a guide and
> > I don't think I missed anything. Still, I can't write anything to the
> > thing. It mounts fine, even shows it is mounted rw. I can't find
> > anything wrong on the puter or NAS ends. This reminds me of the last
> > time I played with BSD. It works so different, it just throws a person
> > upside down and shakes them.
> >
> > I did switch to TrueNAS tho. Thing is, I got the same result from both,
> > exact same error. Can't be a bug. It has to be me. No idea what I
> > missed but I bet I did. lol Just gonna keep banging on it. :-D I do
> > like the GUI part. That's pretty neat.
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > :-) :-)
> >
>
>
> Update. I thought about just using Dolphin to play with the directory
> that's actually on the NAS. I could create folders and files just fine
> with Dolphin. Well, isn't that interesting. Finally I found a comment
> with google that gave me a clue. I needed to change the options I use
> with rsync plus it appears on my computer, I need to su to dale, same
> user as on NAS. Now it works. I can rsync my files over.
>
> Then I noticed something else. The network card in the NAS box, it's a
> old 100MB card. Has anyone ever poured cold molasses before? Does
> waiting on leap year sound familiar? ROFL Just saying.
>
> Hey, at least I got the silly thing to work, slowly, but works. :/
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)

Congrats on making progress.

Is this still FreeNAS or did you switch to TrueNAS Core?

Yeah, 100Mb/S, or say 12MB/S takes days to move
multiple Terrabytes. I did it inside of a screen session so that
I could disconnect and leave it running in the background
without having to watch cold molasses flow. I'm looking
to upgrade everything to 2.5Gb/S or higher one of these
days but once the initial backup is done regular backups
are reasonably fast.

I was disappointed in the info Frank found about not being
able to bond Pools, but it still makes me wonder if someone
could create a 14TB RAID0 outside of the pool and then bond
that RAID0 with a 14TB drive to make a 14TB ZFS RAID1.

Not looking to do it myself though... ;-)

- Mark
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 6:55 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com
> <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Dale wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting info.  Since this is a duplicate copy already, I'm not to
> > > worried about RAID stuff.  I'd rather have two separate backups
> myself.
> > > Store them in different places for even more safety.  Still, one of
> > > these days.  ;-)
> > >
> > > I'm still getting this error.
> > >
> > > root@fireball ~ # mkdir /mnt/Backup/Videos
> > > mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/mnt/Backup/Videos’: Permission denied
> > > root@fireball ~ #
> > >
> > > I've tried every permission in every place I can find.  I have a user
> > > set up, set permissions under storage and pools, all the little
> > > directory thingys under it too.  It mounts so I'd think I got
> everything
> > > set up correctly in the Share section.  I actually followed a
> guide and
> > > I don't think I missed anything.  Still, I can't write anything to the
> > > thing.  It mounts fine, even shows it is mounted rw.  I can't find
> > > anything wrong on the puter or NAS ends.  This reminds me of the last
> > > time I played with BSD.  It works so different, it just throws a
> person
> > > upside down and shakes them.
> > >
> > > I did switch to TrueNAS tho.  Thing is, I got the same result from
> both,
> > > exact same error.  Can't be a bug.  It has to be me.  No idea what I
> > > missed but I bet I did.  lol  Just gonna keep banging on it.  :-D
>  I do
> > > like the GUI part.  That's pretty neat.
> > >
> > > Dale
> > >
> > > :-) :-)
> > >
> >
> >
> > Update.  I thought about just using Dolphin to play with the directory
> > that's actually on the NAS.  I could create folders and files just fine
> > with Dolphin.  Well, isn't that interesting.  Finally I found a comment
> > with google that gave me a clue.  I needed to change the options I use
> > with rsync plus it appears on my computer, I need to su to dale, same
> > user as on NAS.  Now it works.  I can rsync my files over.
> >
> > Then I noticed something else.  The network card in the NAS box, it's a
> > old 100MB card.  Has anyone ever poured cold molasses before?  Does
> > waiting on leap year sound familiar?  ROFL  Just saying.
> >
> > Hey, at least I got the silly thing to work, slowly, but works.  :/
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > :-)  :-)
>
> Congrats on making progress.
>
> Is this still FreeNAS or did you switch to TrueNAS Core?
>
> Yeah, 100Mb/S, or say 12MB/S takes days to move 
> multiple Terrabytes. I did it inside of a screen session so that
> I could disconnect and leave it running in the background
> without having to watch cold molasses flow. I'm looking
> to upgrade everything to 2.5Gb/S or higher one of these 
> days but once the initial backup is done regular backups
> are reasonably fast.
>
> I was disappointed in the info Frank found about not being
> able to bond Pools, but it still makes me wonder if someone
> could create a 14TB RAID0 outside of the pool and then bond 
> that RAID0 with a 14TB drive to make a 14TB ZFS RAID1. 
>
> Not looking to do it myself though... ;-)
>
> - Mark

Well, when I ran into the permission problem, I was going to start over
anyway.  Figured if I was going to start over, may as well switch to
TrueNAS while at it.  So, I switched.  I only used FreeNAS because it
was the first one I found.  It was put on the USB stick ages ago. I'm
keeping a eye out for a small hard drive, 250GB or something to use as
the OS drive in the NAS.  I've read it wears out USB sticks pretty fast. 

At first, I couldn't get both drives to add at the same time.  To work
around that, I set up a pool with one drive.  I then went back and added
the second drive.  Then it was both drives added together, like I do in
LVM.  Then I did the file system thing, dataset I think they call it??? 

After a while, I shutdown the NAS.  I got on Ebay and ordered a 1GB
network card.  Everything I have is 1GB so no need getting anything
faster.  It should be a lot faster and may be about all the NAS rig can
handle anyway.

I haven't figured out how to encrypt it yet tho.  I need to research that. 

Still, progress.

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Dale wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> <<< SNIP >>>
>
> Thoughts?  Info to share?  Ideas on a best path forward?  Buy already
> built or build?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-) 
>


I have a couple questions.  I currently have the NAS thingy on a older
Dell machine.  It has a 4 core CPU and 8GBs of ram so it is acceptable,
for the time being at least.  Bad thing is, only two drive bays.  :/  I
have a few questions that I can't quite find answers to with google. 

1:  I have the OS on a USB stick.  From what I've read, they do fail due
to wear at some point.  If I reinstall TrueNAS on a new USB stick, will
it automatically see the previous pools and such or do I have to set
everything up again fresh?  In other words, will I lose data?  This also
includes if it is encrypted.  Right now it is not, but I plan to restart
and set it up as encrypted shortly.  I suspect that it will work like
LVM does.  I just can't see a OS failure causing a loss of all data. 

2:  Hardware change.  The Dell comes with a 100MB network card.  I
ordered a 1GB card.  I plan to put it in when it gets here.  Will it see
the new card and work automatically or will it take some work to get the
network going?  On my Gentoo rig, I have to enable drivers in the kernel
and recompile.  I'm not sure about BSD tho.  Since it is sort of a
binary thing, does TrueNAS handle hardware changes such as a network
card well? 

I also found out something power wise.  The Dell when booted and sitting
idle consumes about 120 watts monitor and all.  My main rig consumes
just under 200 watts.  Not to bad but a Raspberry Pi would likely
consume 15, 20 watts max according to what I've read.  Given the number
of hard drives, it could pull 25 or 30 watts max but doubtful it would
get that high.  I'm looking at 4 bays but also found a 6 bay.  I think 6
is overkill tho. 

Eventually, I plan to build a Raspberry Pi NAS.  When I do, I'll post
everything major I needed, boards, case etc for everyone to look at. 
I'll even try to upload some pics, or share as attachments if there is
interest.  Unless I find one heck of a deal on a used NAS that is. 
Still may build one even then.  ;-)

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Am Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 10:08:02PM -0600 schrieb Dale:

> I have a couple questions.  I currently have the NAS thingy on a older
> Dell machine.  It has a 4 core CPU and 8GBs of ram so it is acceptable,
> for the time being at least.  Bad thing is, only two drive bays.  :/  I
> have a few questions that I can't quite find answers to with google. 
>
> 1:  I have the OS on a USB stick.  From what I've read, they do fail due
> to wear at some point.

OTOH, TrueNAS is designed to run from it, so I would assume it handles its
root drive with care. Perhaps you can disable verbose logging and such.

> If I reinstall TrueNAS on a new USB stick, will it automatically see the
> previous pools and such or do I have to set everything up again fresh?

Pools and their metadata are stored inside the pools. In Linux, you don’t
even need to set up fstab. The pool stores its mount point internally. So
you just start the zfs daemon and it does everything magically.

> In other words, will I lose data?

You won’t lose data, of course. But I think you meant settings(?). Probably
about users, shares and such. Perhaps it has an export feature which can be
run periodically.

> This also includes if it is encrypted.

Encryption is a built-in ZFS feature. So yes, it will remember that. Not
sure about the decryption process (keyfile).

> 2:  Hardware change.  The Dell comes with a 100MB network card.  I
> ordered a 1GB card.  I plan to put it in when it gets here.  Will it see
> the new card and work automatically or will it take some work to get the
> network going?

I assume the kernel is built like many general-purpose-distros: with
everything in it you may need for the purpose. But since it is BSD, it may
have driver issues (availability and stability for certain cards).
Sometimes, when I read news about a new product, people complain that the
NIC is not Intel and will thus cause problems with BSD, especially with
niche stuff like the Killer-brand ethernet cards.

> and recompile.  I'm not sure about BSD tho.  Since it is sort of a
> binary thing, does TrueNAS handle hardware changes such as a network
> card well? 

I don’t see a connection between being a “binary thing” and hardware change.
Your gentoo is also a binary thing once it is compiled. ;-)

> I also found out something power wise.  The Dell when booted and sitting
> idle consumes about 120 watts monitor and all.

I figured as much when you mentioned its 100 Mbps card. It must be old then,
and back then, idle power was a non-issue.

> My main rig consumes just under 200 watts.  Not to bad

That’s a very lot for my taste. With a lower mid-range GPU (110 W Radeon R7
370) and one spinning rust, my 8-year-old PC used to idle at 50 W. Without
the HDD and with Intel graphics it is now at 27 W. Still not a good number
when compared with today’s hardware.

> but a Raspberry Pi would likely consume 15, 20 watts max according to what
> I've read.

My 3B idles at 5 W tops, I think. It cannot be much more under load since it
comes without a built-in heat spreader.

> Given the number of hard drives, it could pull 25 or 30 watts max but
> doubtful it would get that high.  I'm looking at 4 bays but also found a 6
> bay.  I think 6 is overkill tho. 

My four-bay NAS has four 6 TB drives and it draws around 50 W at idle. But
that’s because it is a server board, incuding IPMI chip (and—interestingly—
an internal USB-A for an OS stick). And it’s Haswell generation, so almost a
decade old design. For this reason I switch it on only every few weeks or
even months and only keep it running for a short time.

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

Death is a permanent damage.
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 9:08 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
> 2: Hardware change. The Dell comes with a 100MB network card. I
> ordered a 1GB card. I plan to put it in when it gets here. Will it see
> the new card and work automatically or will it take some work to get the
> network going? On my Gentoo rig, I have to enable drivers in the kernel
> and recompile. I'm not sure about BSD tho. Since it is sort of a
> binary thing, does TrueNAS handle hardware changes such as a network
> card well?
<SNIP>

At the risk of repeating a bit of what Frank said I'll put in my 2 cents as
a
TrueNAS user. No intention to be snarky on my side, just pointing
a few things out.

1) Welcome to the world of "not Gentoo". What I think you are describing
as a 'binary thing' is, for the most part, the way we work out here.

2) I disagree with your description of how "it's done" in Gentoo Land. You
made a choice to put your network driver in the kernel. You could have
built it as a module and loaded that module. Both would have worked.

3) Out here in Not Gentoo Land (NGL) they supply you with 100's of
modules and generally installers figure out which ones to load. My main
NGL machine has literally over 100 modules loaded. I don't know what
they do (for the most part) and mostly I don't care.

4) While I cannot tell you if the card you ordered has a Linux or FreeBSD
driver, I can point out that on the left hand side of your TrueNAS
dashboard, accessible in your browser hopefully, there is a pulldown
called 'Network'. It should hopefully show you the current network
interface which in my case is called 're0'. On the right you might,
hopefully
possibly see a big blue button called "ADD". Consider giving that button
a push after you've installed your new card.

I believe you will get this figured out very soon. Continue exploring
the NGL world.

Mark
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> Am Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 10:08:02PM -0600 schrieb Dale:
>
>> I have a couple questions.  I currently have the NAS thingy on a older
>> Dell machine.  It has a 4 core CPU and 8GBs of ram so it is acceptable,
>> for the time being at least.  Bad thing is, only two drive bays.  :/  I
>> have a few questions that I can't quite find answers to with google. 
>>
>> 1:  I have the OS on a USB stick.  From what I've read, they do fail due
>> to wear at some point.
> OTOH, TrueNAS is designed to run from it, so I would assume it handles its
> root drive with care. Perhaps you can disable verbose logging and such.

I've just read that changes were made a while back and they recommend
not using a USB stick anymore.  It works but they tend to not last as
long as they once did.  There could be any number of variables in that
tho. 

>
>> If I reinstall TrueNAS on a new USB stick, will it automatically see the
>> previous pools and such or do I have to set everything up again fresh?
> Pools and their metadata are stored inside the pools. In Linux, you don’t
> even need to set up fstab. The pool stores its mount point internally. So
> you just start the zfs daemon and it does everything magically.
>
>> In other words, will I lose data?
> You won’t lose data, of course. But I think you meant settings(?). Probably
> about users, shares and such. Perhaps it has an export feature which can be
> run periodically.
>
>> This also includes if it is encrypted.
> Encryption is a built-in ZFS feature. So yes, it will remember that. Not
> sure about the decryption process (keyfile).

That's what I was expecting.  I may test that theory just so I don't run
into any surprises.  I kinda figure it works a lot like LVM does. 
Different but details stored on the drive itself.  Basically, works
wherever you put it. 


>
>> 2:  Hardware change.  The Dell comes with a 100MB network card.  I
>> ordered a 1GB card.  I plan to put it in when it gets here.  Will it see
>> the new card and work automatically or will it take some work to get the
>> network going?
> I assume the kernel is built like many general-purpose-distros: with
> everything in it you may need for the purpose. But since it is BSD, it may
> have driver issues (availability and stability for certain cards).
> Sometimes, when I read news about a new product, people complain that the
> NIC is not Intel and will thus cause problems with BSD, especially with
> niche stuff like the Killer-brand ethernet cards.
>
>> and recompile.  I'm not sure about BSD tho.  Since it is sort of a
>> binary thing, does TrueNAS handle hardware changes such as a network
>> card well? 
> I don’t see a connection between being a “binary thing” and hardware change.
> Your gentoo is also a binary thing once it is compiled. ;-)

My thinking was, I didn't compile any of the software myself.  Sort of
like if I install a binary based distro.  It may have a feature or
driver turned on, it may not. Maybe you are right, it will at least have
the driver it needs built as a module and it will load it and work
fine.  I have the same card in my Gentoo box so it is Linux compatible
so in theory, should work in BSD as well.  I'd think.  ;-)  First thing,
it has to get here.  It's already two days later than originally claimed. 

>> I also found out something power wise.  The Dell when booted and sitting
>> idle consumes about 120 watts monitor and all.
> I figured as much when you mentioned its 100 Mbps card. It must be old then,
> and back then, idle power was a non-issue.
>
>> My main rig consumes just under 200 watts.  Not to bad
> That’s a very lot for my taste. With a lower mid-range GPU (110 W Radeon R7
> 370) and one spinning rust, my 8-year-old PC used to idle at 50 W. Without
> the HDD and with Intel graphics it is now at 27 W. Still not a good number
> when compared with today’s hardware.

My Gentoo rig is a little old too.  AMD 8 core CPU, 32GBs of memory,
LOTS of hard drives.  I think there is eight in there right now.  A
couple may be older but most are newer. 


>> but a Raspberry Pi would likely consume 15, 20 watts max according to what
>> I've read.
> My 3B idles at 5 W tops, I think. It cannot be much more under load since it
> comes without a built-in heat spreader.
>
>> Given the number of hard drives, it could pull 25 or 30 watts max but
>> doubtful it would get that high.  I'm looking at 4 bays but also found a 6
>> bay.  I think 6 is overkill tho. 
> My four-bay NAS has four 6 TB drives and it draws around 50 W at idle. But
> that’s because it is a server board, incuding IPMI chip (and—interestingly—
> an internal USB-A for an OS stick). And it’s Haswell generation, so almost a
> decade old design. For this reason I switch it on only every few weeks or
> even months and only keep it running for a short time.
>

From what I've read, the Raspberry Pi pretty much all sip on power. 
They really efficient.  It's nice to know that even tho the one you
mention is more powerful, even it only pulls 50 watts.  Thing is, I
don't plan to run the one I build except when updating backups.  The
rest of the time, tucked into the fire safe. 

Thanks for the info.  Now to read next response. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 9:08 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com
> <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > 2:  Hardware change.  The Dell comes with a 100MB network card.  I
> > ordered a 1GB card.  I plan to put it in when it gets here.  Will it see
> > the new card and work automatically or will it take some work to get the
> > network going?  On my Gentoo rig, I have to enable drivers in the kernel
> > and recompile.  I'm not sure about BSD tho.  Since it is sort of a
> > binary thing, does TrueNAS handle hardware changes such as a network
> > card well?
> <SNIP>
>
> At the risk of repeating a bit of what Frank said I'll put in my 2
> cents as a
> TrueNAS user. No intention to be snarky on my side, just pointing
> a few things out.
>
> 1) Welcome to the world of "not Gentoo". What I think you are describing
> as a 'binary thing' is, for the most part, the way we work out here.
>
> 2) I disagree with your description of how "it's done" in Gentoo Land. You
> made a choice to put your network driver in the kernel. You could have
> built it as a module and loaded that module. Both would have worked.
>
> 3) Out here in Not Gentoo Land (NGL) they supply you with 100's of
> modules and generally installers figure out which ones to load. My main 
> NGL machine has literally over 100 modules loaded. I don't know what 
> they do (for the most part) and mostly I don't care.
>
> 4) While I cannot tell you if the card you ordered has a Linux or FreeBSD
> driver, I can point out that on the left hand side of your TrueNAS 
> dashboard, accessible in your browser hopefully, there is a pulldown
> called 'Network'. It should hopefully show you the current network
> interface which in my case is called 're0'. On the right you might,
> hopefully
> possibly see a big blue button called "ADD". Consider giving that button 
> a push after you've installed your new card.
>
>    I believe you will get this figured out very soon. Continue exploring
> the NGL world. 
>
> Mark


1:  The binary thing is a distro or package that I don't compile
myself.  So, yea, not Gentoo. 

2:  True for some I guess.  The only module I have is my video drivers. 
I build everything else I need into the kernel.  It's how I learned to
do it ages ago and so far, it works really well.  BSD tho may do that a
different way.  I played with BSD once years ago.  I been doing the
Gentoo way for a LOT longer.  Last binary distro I used was Mandrake and
it changed names a long time ago I think. 

3:  That's what I'm hoping for but with no recent BSD experience and not
able to find info with google, I hoped someone who used TrueNAS or BSD
would know how its done.  A couple people did.  ;-) 

4:  I have a monitor hooked up still so I can do it the text way if
needed.  It mentions about setting up the network as one of the
options.  Since you mentioned it has a GUI option, I may just do that. 
So long as it works. 

Thanks for the info.  It helped. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Am Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 04:43:25PM -0600 schrieb Dale:

> > 4) While I cannot tell you if the card you ordered has a Linux or FreeBSD
> > driver, I can point out that on the left hand side of your TrueNAS 
> > dashboard, accessible in your browser hopefully, there is a pulldown
> > called 'Network'. It should hopefully show you the current network
> > interface which in my case is called 're0'. On the right you might,
> > hopefully
> > possibly see a big blue button called "ADD". Consider giving that button 
> > a push after you've installed your new card.

> 4:  I have a monitor hooked up still so I can do it the text way if
> needed.  It mentions about setting up the network as one of the
> options.
>
> Since you mentioned it has a GUI option, I may just do that. 
> So long as it works. 

That’s what I referred to earlier: you get a web interface built-in that
takes care of all the chores. I always wanted to set up shares on my NAS so
that guests could easily access it anonymously, but safely (meaning: no
write access). I never had the patience to go through the whole setup of ftp
and/or samba with the proper users and directories. But a web UI could take
care of all of that. Plus it’s shiny. :D

My point is: there is no need for a monitor. ;-)

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

LCARS - Linux Can Also Run Starships
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> Am Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 04:43:25PM -0600 schrieb Dale:
>
>>> 4) While I cannot tell you if the card you ordered has a Linux or FreeBSD
>>> driver, I can point out that on the left hand side of your TrueNAS 
>>> dashboard, accessible in your browser hopefully, there is a pulldown
>>> called 'Network'. It should hopefully show you the current network
>>> interface which in my case is called 're0'. On the right you might,
>>> hopefully
>>> possibly see a big blue button called "ADD". Consider giving that button 
>>> a push after you've installed your new card.
>> 4:  I have a monitor hooked up still so I can do it the text way if
>> needed.  It mentions about setting up the network as one of the
>> options.
>>
>> Since you mentioned it has a GUI option, I may just do that. 
>> So long as it works. 
> That’s what I referred to earlier: you get a web interface built-in that
> takes care of all the chores. I always wanted to set up shares on my NAS so
> that guests could easily access it anonymously, but safely (meaning: no
> write access). I never had the patience to go through the whole setup of ftp
> and/or samba with the proper users and directories. But a web UI could take
> care of all of that. Plus it’s shiny. :D
>
> My point is: there is no need for a monitor. ;-)
>

I noticing that now.  Once the install is done and you have the IP
address, heck, you don't need a monitor for much of anything it
appears.  I even found a console so one can type in things to do.  I
wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that?  That would be
interesting.  I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
instead.  Interesting thought.  I just may go bug google on that one.  o_O

The network card is getting closer.  May be here tomorrow.  Maybe.  One
can never really tell about these things. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Am Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 09:50:01PM -0600 schrieb Dale:

> > My point is: there is no need for a monitor. ;-)
> >
>
> I noticing that now.  Once the install is done and you have the IP
> address, heck, you don't need a monitor for much of anything it
> appears.  I even found a console so one can type in things to do.  I
> wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that?  That would be
> interesting.
>
> I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM instead.  Interesting
> thought.  I just may go bug google on that one.  o_O

Interestingly, after feeding LVM NAS to my search engine, one of the first
results was a Qnap user forum thread which reads that Qnaps use LVM. It
makes sense, since they most likely use a “normal” linux software RAID
underneath, and LVM is then the best way to dynamically manage the space on
top of that.

While ZFS has the same pooling feature as LVM, meaning you can bunch several
disks together to create a JBOD, it has one big disadvantage over LVM: you
can grow a pool, but not shrink it. Actually, while reading up on stuff for
this thread, I learned that these days it is actually possible to remove a
mirror vdev from a mirror-only pool (a mirror can technically also be a
single device). But according to
https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/solaris/ZFSWhyNoVdevRemoval
it’s not perfect either.

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

5 of 4 people have problems with subsets.
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> Am Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 09:50:01PM -0600 schrieb Dale:
>
>>> My point is: there is no need for a monitor. ;-)
>>>
>> I noticing that now.  Once the install is done and you have the IP
>> address, heck, you don't need a monitor for much of anything it
>> appears.  I even found a console so one can type in things to do.  I
>> wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that?  That would be
>> interesting.
>>
>> I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM instead.  Interesting
>> thought.  I just may go bug google on that one.  o_O
> Interestingly, after feeding LVM NAS to my search engine, one of the first
> results was a Qnap user forum thread which reads that Qnaps use LVM. It
> makes sense, since they most likely use a “normal” linux software RAID
> underneath, and LVM is then the best way to dynamically manage the space on
> top of that.
>
> While ZFS has the same pooling feature as LVM, meaning you can bunch several
> disks together to create a JBOD, it has one big disadvantage over LVM: you
> can grow a pool, but not shrink it. Actually, while reading up on stuff for
> this thread, I learned that these days it is actually possible to remove a
> mirror vdev from a mirror-only pool (a mirror can technically also be a
> single device). But according to
> https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/solaris/ZFSWhyNoVdevRemoval
> it’s not perfect either.
>


With LVM, I usually either move data to a larger drive or just add a
additional drive.  I think I shrunk once, I think.  Still, one always
wants to have options.

One thing about LVM, I already know how to use it.  I've got notes on
how to do things and it has worked.  With ZFS I'd have to learn it all
over again plus it could confuse me with my using LVM on my main rig. 
In a way, if I build a Raspberry NAS, I'd like to have Linux and LVM on
the thing.  At least then I have experience moving data and such.  Right
now, I don't even have the basics of ZFS or BSD.  I'm not saying TrueNAS
is bad or anything, just that I don't really care for the learning
curve.  Then the confusion part on top of that. 

I've read there are distros built for Raspberry thingys.  I'd be shocked
if it isn't doable.  I'd be shocked if someone hasn't already done it
even.   

Time will tell I guess.

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Am Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 12:49:01AM -0600 schrieb Dale:

> > While ZFS has the same pooling feature as LVM, meaning you can bunch several
> > disks together to create a JBOD, it has one big disadvantage over LVM: you
> > can grow a pool, but not shrink it. Actually, while reading up on stuff for
> > this thread, I learned that these days it is actually possible to remove a
> > mirror vdev from a mirror-only pool (a mirror can technically also be a
> > single device). But according to
> > https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/solaris/ZFSWhyNoVdevRemoval
> > it’s not perfect either.
> >
>
> One thing about LVM, I already know how to use it.  I've got notes on
> how to do things and it has worked.  With ZFS I'd have to learn it all
> over again plus it could confuse me with my using LVM on my main rig. 
> In a way, if I build a Raspberry NAS, I'd like to have Linux and LVM on
> the thing.  At least then I have experience moving data and such.  Right
> now, I don't even have the basics of ZFS or BSD.  I'm not saying TrueNAS
> is bad or anything, just that I don't really care for the learning
> curve.  Then the confusion part on top of that. 

The beauty of the WebUI is that it abstracts all of that away. You don’t
have to be in the know about the inner works and create pools and vdevs by
hand. Though it might be handy in case something breaks in an unexpected
way.

> I've read there are distros built for Raspberry thingys.  I'd be shocked
> if it isn't doable.  I'd be shocked if someone hasn't already done it
> even.   

It’s called RaspberryPi OS (formerly knows as Raspbian). It has the kernel,
some start scripts and settings files that control which stuff to load at
boot. Pis boot differently to x86 hardware; there is no Grub & co.

I don’t particularly like Debian’s apt, which is why I’m also experimenting
with Arch on arm, Arch being my favorite distro for my everyday these days.

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

“Oh, gravity, thou art a heartless bitch.” – Dr. Sheldon Cooper
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 8:50 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
> I noticing that now. Once the install is done and you have the IP
> address, heck, you don't need a monitor for much of anything it
> appears. I even found a console so one can type in things to do.

Exactly. My TrueNAS machines haven't had a monitor attached
since they were built. Everything you need is there. It's more a
storage appliance than a computer.

> I
> wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that? That would be
> interesting. I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
> instead. Interesting thought. I just may go bug google on that one. o_O

Maybe I'm missing the point but why would you want LVM on a
storage pool? If I'm doing backups I just want space. I let TrueNas
put it on disk and give it back if asked. Why put another layer
of indirection?

If you're intending to use it as simple NAS - i.e. - the only copy
of some data on your network - then possibly LVM might
be interesting, but then you need a second TrueNAS box
to back that up. NAS as a mountable data location is
different than NAS doing backups which is what I thought
this thread was about. What am I not remembering?

- Mark
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 8:50 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com
> <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > I
> > wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that?  That would be
> > interesting.  I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
> > instead.  Interesting thought.  I just may go bug google on that
> one.  o_O
>
> Maybe I'm missing the point but why would you want LVM on a
> storage pool? If I'm doing backups I just want space. I let TrueNas 
> put it on disk and give it back if asked. Why put another layer
> of indirection?
>
> If you're intending to use it as simple NAS - i.e. - the only copy
> of some data on your network - then possibly LVM might
> be interesting, but then you need a second TrueNAS box
> to back that up. NAS as a mountable data location is
> different than NAS doing backups which is what I thought
> this thread was about. What am I not remembering?
>
> - Mark

It's more about me being more used to using LVM.  Also, more used to
Linux as well.  BSD is not something I have much experience with and
until recently, none with ZFS.  Even the little experience I have with
BSD was well over a decade ago, maybe two decades ago.  I barely
remember it really.

By replacing ZFS with LVM, I'm working with something I'm familiar with
and less likely to mess up things.  Things get messed up enough without
adding more confusion.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:52 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 8:50 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I
> > wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that? That would be
> > interesting. I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
> > instead. Interesting thought. I just may go bug google on that one.
o_O
>
> Maybe I'm missing the point but why would you want LVM on a
> storage pool? If I'm doing backups I just want space. I let TrueNas
> put it on disk and give it back if asked. Why put another layer
> of indirection?
>
> If you're intending to use it as simple NAS - i.e. - the only copy
> of some data on your network - then possibly LVM might
> be interesting, but then you need a second TrueNAS box
> to back that up. NAS as a mountable data location is
> different than NAS doing backups which is what I thought
> this thread was about. What am I not remembering?
>
> - Mark
>
>
> It's more about me being more used to using LVM. Also, more used to
Linux as well. BSD is not something I have much experience with and until
recently, none with ZFS. Even the little experience I have with BSD was
well over a decade ago, maybe two decades ago. I barely remember it really.
>
> By replacing ZFS with LVM, I'm working with something I'm familiar with
and less likely to mess up things. Things get messed up enough without
adding more confusion. ;-)
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)

Hummm...I don't know Dale, I don't know... ZFS is a file system.
LVM is an abstraction on top (or underneath?) of a file system.
My understanding of LVM is that it frees you from hard decisions
on partition sizes, not that it replaces ZFS or ext3/4/5.

You may or may not know this but TrueNAS is available as a
Linux version:

https://www.truenas.com/blog/first-release-of-truenas-on-linux/

I don't recommend it. It's new. Let someone else figure it out. However
it might be more to your liking, and because it's Linux you'd be more
comfortable messing it up. ;0-

WRT you I recommend that you try living in NGL for a while. Possibly
you are just a bit too indoctrinated in the religion of building packages
30-50 times a year believing (without hard data) that it provides value.
Instead you might just consider relaxing and letting the system
take care of itself. In the last year I've only updated my TrueNAS box
twice that I can remember.

On the other hand if system tweaking is what brings you joy then
Que Sera Sera .....

Good luck,
Mark
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:52 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com
> <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Mark Knecht wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 8:50 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com
> <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > I
> > > wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that?  That would be
> > > interesting.  I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
> > > instead.  Interesting thought.  I just may go bug google on that
> one.  o_O
> >
> > Maybe I'm missing the point but why would you want LVM on a
> > storage pool? If I'm doing backups I just want space. I let TrueNas
> > put it on disk and give it back if asked. Why put another layer
> > of indirection?
> >
> > If you're intending to use it as simple NAS - i.e. - the only copy
> > of some data on your network - then possibly LVM might
> > be interesting, but then you need a second TrueNAS box
> > to back that up. NAS as a mountable data location is
> > different than NAS doing backups which is what I thought
> > this thread was about. What am I not remembering?
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> >
> > It's more about me being more used to using LVM.  Also, more used to
> Linux as well.  BSD is not something I have much experience with and
> until recently, none with ZFS.  Even the little experience I have with
> BSD was well over a decade ago, maybe two decades ago.  I barely
> remember it really.
> >
> > By replacing ZFS with LVM, I'm working with something I'm familiar
> with and less likely to mess up things.  Things get messed up enough
> without adding more confusion.  ;-)
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > :-)  :-)
>
> Hummm...I don't know Dale, I don't know... ZFS is a file system.
> LVM is an abstraction on top (or underneath?) of a file system.
> My understanding of LVM is that it frees you from hard decisions
> on partition sizes, not that it replaces ZFS or ext3/4/5.
>

That is true.  Thing is, I've learned how to manage LVM even with
encrypted data.  I've also learned how to expand storage without losing
data or getting confused about what I'm doing.  To me, using LVM is
pretty easy given the notes I have for the tasks I do most often. 


> You may or may not know this but TrueNAS is available as a 
> Linux version:
>
> https://www.truenas.com/blog/first-release-of-truenas-on-linux/
>
> I don't recommend it. It's new. Let someone else figure it out. However
> it might be more to your liking, and because it's Linux you'd be more
> comfortable messing it up. ;0-
>
> WRT you I recommend that you try living in NGL for a while. Possibly 
> you are just a bit too indoctrinated in the religion of building packages 
> 30-50 times a year believing (without hard data) that it provides value. 
> Instead you might just consider relaxing and letting the system 
> take care of itself. In the last year I've only updated my TrueNAS box
> twice that I can remember.
>
> On the other hand if system tweaking is what brings you joy then
> Que Sera Sera .....
>
> Good luck,
> Mark


It's not that I want to compile things, it's that I want to use things
I'm already really familiar with.  If I bought a Raspberry Pi and built
a NAS with it, I don't care if I compile the software on it or not as
long as it has the software I need or I can install what I need.  From
what I've read, compiling on a Raspberry isn't much fun.  It's very time
consuming. Having a OS, binary one at that, that is Linux based is a big
plus.  I can run LVM, cryptsetup and such in likely every Linux distro
out there and get the same result as on my Gentoo box.  Switching to
BSD, using ZFS, means I have to learn a whole new set of tools and
methods.  I had enough fun learning LVM and I don't think LVM is going
to die anytime soon.  It should be around for the foreseeable future. 
As it is, even now, I still don't get how ZFS works.  I just followed a
guide to get it working, sort of.  It's still not encrypted.  Figuring
that out is next.  That should be fun. 

My network card is out for delivery.  A few days late but better than
never I guess.  I'll see if the drivers needed for it are available as
modules or not.  I suspect they are tho based on info in this thread. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 9:42 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>
<SNIP>
>
> That is true. Thing is, I've learned how to manage LVM even with
encrypted data. I've also learned how to expand storage without losing
data or getting confused about what I'm doing. To me, using LVM is pretty
easy given the notes I have for the tasks I do most often.
>
<SNIP>
> It's not that I want to compile things, it's that I want to use things
I'm already really familiar with. If I bought a Raspberry Pi and built a
NAS with it, I don't care if I compile the software on it or not as long as
it has the software I need or I can install what I need. From what I've
read, compiling on a Raspberry isn't much fun. It's very time consuming.
Having a OS, binary one at that, that is Linux based is a big plus. I can
run LVM, cryptsetup and such in likely every Linux distro out there and get
the same result as on my Gentoo box. Switching to BSD, using ZFS, means I
have to learn a whole new set of tools and methods. I had enough fun
learning LVM and I don't think LVM is going to die anytime soon. It should
be around for the foreseeable future. As it is, even now, I still don't
get how ZFS works. I just followed a guide to get it working, sort of.
It's still not encrypted. Figuring that out is next. That should be fun.
>

Maybe just live with TrueNAS for a month or two and get to know it on a
friendly level first?

I think I'm still not understanding the need for LVM. Help me understand. I
see ZFS on TrueNAS as a combination of mdadm and a file system. I'm not
sure I even have partitions. My ZFS pool is just using the whole drive, but
that was all I wanted. Are you planning on using your drive space for other
things? (Plex server in a jail, or remote real-time storage for instance)
If so maybe LVM would help isolate backups - which I thought was why you
wanted this machine - from a VM of some type running on the same machine -
which I don't think you've suggested.

> My network card is out for delivery. A few days late but better than
never I guess. I'll see if the drivers needed for it are available as
modules or not. I suspect they are tho based on info in this thread.

Good luck. Hope the new card makes your life easier.
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On 17/12/2022 16:09, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Hummm...I don't know Dale, I don't know... ZFS is a file system.
> LVM is an abstraction on top (or underneath?) of a file system.
> My understanding of LVM is that it frees you from hard decisions
> on partition sizes, not that it replaces ZFS or ext3/4/5.

Do one thing and do it well. That's LVM. Or ext.

Jack of all trades. That's ZFS.

Do you want the filesystem doing everything from the hard drive up? Use ZFS.

Do you want the system layered, with each layer doing one job? Use
dm-integrity to protect against corruption, raid to join the disks, lvm
to partition them, and ext to manage the directories and files.

I do the latter ...

Cheers,
Wol
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 12:10 PM Wol <antlists@youngman.org.uk> wrote:
<SNIP>
> Do you want the system layered, with each layer doing one job? Use
> dm-integrity to protect against corruption, raid to join the disks, lvm
> to partition them, and ext to manage the directories and files.
>
> I do the latter ...

No argument there, at least on a group of drives where you
want to have flexibility in the future. Desktop computers or
system drives certainly. You didn't tell me what replaces
the compression aspect of the problem but I'm sure there's
something. It's a great strategy if you have the expertise and
time to set it up and then manage it when a problem arises,
if it ever arises.

I'm just asking what's the purpose of doing LVM, or your
suggested layering, specifically on a storage pool for a
home user like Dale? That's the part I don't understand,
especially for a new NAS user like Dale?

Mark
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Am Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 09:09:48AM -0700 schrieb Mark Knecht:

> On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:52 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > I
> > > wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that? That would be
> > > interesting. I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
> > > instead. Interesting thought. I just may go bug google on that one.
> >
> > Maybe I'm missing the point but why would you want LVM on a
> > storage pool? If I'm doing backups I just want space. I let TrueNas
> > put it on disk and give it back if asked. Why put another layer
> > of indirection?
> > […]
> It's more about me being more used to using LVM. Also, more used to
> Linux as well. BSD is not something I have much experience with and until
> recently, none with ZFS. Even the little experience I have with BSD was
> well over a decade ago, maybe two decades ago. I barely remember it really.

The truenas interface is supposed to hide all that from you. As Mark wrote
two posts up, it’s an appliance. You install it once, that’s it. I think you
can install addons, but don’t have to. You maybe do updates once in a while,
perhaps not even that if it’s a critical production host. You don’t ssh into
it to do maintenance or to add or remove disks on the commandline. That’s
what the web UI is for. All of it. The biggest and most obvious difference
for me would be how devices are named in comparison to Linux.

> Hummm...I don't know Dale, I don't know... ZFS is a file system.
> LVM is an abstraction on top (or underneath?) of a file system.
> My understanding of LVM is that it frees you from hard decisions
> on partition sizes, not that it replaces ZFS or ext3/4/5.

LVM is “just” an abstraction layer between file system and storage. At the
bottom there are your block devices (drives, image files), which then may or
may not be RAIDed. Then you have LVM on top of that to encompass all those
devices into one big “virtual hard drive” and partition it (logical
volumes). And lastly you put file systems into those volumes. So there are
two, three (or even four, if you add encryption somewhere in between) layers
stacked onto your raw devices.

ZFS OTOH is all of that in one. It takes the raw block devices as a whole,
puts them (optionally) into redundancy structures, allows for “partitions”
(i.e. datasets) and lastly also *is* the file system. The advantage is that
it can combine its knowledge about all those layers to improve performance
and reliability. So for instance it distributes writes according to vdev
occupancy (LVM has no knowledge about the FS layer above it). Or when you
rebuild a RAID, only those parts that are actually used by the FS need to be
reconstructed, not the whole disk.

I may come off as a ZFS fanboy in this thread. But I am in no way an expert,
just a small-time user with just that one NAS with one RAID setup. That’s
it. I did a lot of reading beforehand, whether I should use it or mdadm or
btrfs. All my knowledge comes from that time, I never worked with it in my
professional life.

I also use LVM on my systems these days, just in case my root partition
becomes crowded and needs some extra space that I can take from the media
partition. Had to do this once, it went quick and was a fun experience.

> WRT you I recommend that you try living in NGL for a while. Possibly
> you are just a bit too indoctrinated in the religion of building packages
> 30-50 times a year believing (without hard data) that it provides value.

+1
I admit I like the occasional update of my Gentoo NAS. But that’s also
because it’s my last living Gentoo device. I always liked the environment,
still do. Gentoo was my first Linux after all, that stuff stays in your
mind. But oh the time-consuming hassle sometimes.

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

The fantasy of men is often inadequate to grasp the reality of women.
Re: NAS and replacing with larger drives [ In reply to ]
Dave

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 11:42 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 8:52 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Mark Knecht wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 8:50 PM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I
> > > wonder, could one install the LVM stuff and use that? That would be
> > > interesting. I wonder if there is a NAS software that uses LVM
> > > instead. Interesting thought. I just may go bug google on that one.
> o_O
> >
> > Maybe I'm missing the point but why would you want LVM on a
> > storage pool? If I'm doing backups I just want space. I let TrueNas
> > put it on disk and give it back if asked. Why put another layer
> > of indirection?
> >
> > If you're intending to use it as simple NAS - i.e. - the only copy
> > of some data on your network - then possibly LVM might
> > be interesting, but then you need a second TrueNAS box
> > to back that up. NAS as a mountable data location is
> > different than NAS doing backups which is what I thought
> > this thread was about. What am I not remembering?
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> >
> > It's more about me being more used to using LVM. Also, more used to
> Linux as well. BSD is not something I have much experience with and until
> recently, none with ZFS. Even the little experience I have with BSD was
> well over a decade ago, maybe two decades ago. I barely remember it really.
> >
> > By replacing ZFS with LVM, I'm working with something I'm familiar with
> and less likely to mess up things. Things get messed up enough without
> adding more confusion. ;-)
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > :-) :-)
>
> Hummm...I don't know Dale, I don't know... ZFS is a file system.
> LVM is an abstraction on top (or underneath?) of a file system.
> My understanding of LVM is that it frees you from hard decisions
> on partition sizes, not that it replaces ZFS or ext3/4/5.
>
>
> That is true. Thing is, I've learned how to manage LVM even with
> encrypted data. I've also learned how to expand storage without losing
> data or getting confused about what I'm doing. To me, using LVM is pretty
> easy given the notes I have for the tasks I do most often.
>
>
> You may or may not know this but TrueNAS is available as a
> Linux version:
>
> https://www.truenas.com/blog/first-release-of-truenas-on-linux/
>
> I don't recommend it. It's new. Let someone else figure it out. However
> it might be more to your liking, and because it's Linux you'd be more
> comfortable messing it up. ;0-
>
> WRT you I recommend that you try living in NGL for a while. Possibly
> you are just a bit too indoctrinated in the religion of building packages
> 30-50 times a year believing (without hard data) that it provides value.
> Instead you might just consider relaxing and letting the system
> take care of itself. In the last year I've only updated my TrueNAS box
> twice that I can remember.
>
> On the other hand if system tweaking is what brings you joy then
> Que Sera Sera .....
>
> Good luck,
> Mark
>
>
>
> It's not that I want to compile things, it's that I want to use things I'm
> already really familiar with. If I bought a Raspberry Pi and built a NAS
> with it, I don't care if I compile the software on it or not as long as it
> has the software I need or I can install what I need. From what I've read,
> compiling on a Raspberry isn't much fun. It's very time consuming. Having
> a OS, binary one at that, that is Linux based is a big plus. I can run
> LVM, cryptsetup and such in likely every Linux distro out there and get the
> same result as on my Gentoo box. Switching to BSD, using ZFS, means I have
> to learn a whole new set of tools and methods. I had enough fun learning
> LVM and I don't think LVM is going to die anytime soon. It should be
> around for the foreseeable future. As it is, even now, I still don't get
> how ZFS works. I just followed a guide to get it working, sort of. It's
> still not encrypted. Figuring that out is next. That should be fun.
>
> My network card is out for delivery. A few days late but better than
> never I guess. I'll see if the drivers needed for it are available as
> modules or not. I suspect they are tho based on info in this thread.
>
> Dale
>
> :-) :-)
>

1 2 3 4 5  View All