At the moment I have my NAS setup as a Proxmox VM with a hardware RAID card handling 6 2TB disks. My VMs are running on NVMEs with the NAS VM handling the data storage with the RAIDed volume passed through to the VM direct in Proxmox. I am running it as a large ext4 partition. Mostly photos, personal docs and a few films. Only I really use it. My desktop and laptop mount it over NFS. I have restic backups running weekly to two external HDDs. It all works pretty well and has for years.

I am now getting ZFS curious. I know I’ll need to IT flash the HBA, or get another. I’m guessing it’s best to create the zpool in Proxmox and pass that through to the NAS VM? Or would it be better to pass the individual disks through to the VM and manage the zpool from there?

  • paperd@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    If you want multiple VMs to use the storage on the ZFS pool, better to create it in proxmox rather than passing raw disks thru to the VM.

    ZFS is awesome, I wouldn’t use anything else now.

    • SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      If I recall correctly it’s important to be running ECC memory right?

      Otherwise corrupter bites/data can cause file system issues or loss.

      • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        You recall wrong. ECC is recommended for any server system but not necessary.

        • RaccoonBall@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          And if you dont have ECC zfs just might save your bacon when a more basic fs would allow corruption

  • Mio@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am more looking into BTRF for backup due to I run Linux and not BSD ZFS requires more RAM I only have one disk I want to benefit from snapshots, compression and deduplication.

        • blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.ukOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It stole all my data. It’s a bit of a clusterfuck of a file system, especially one so old. This article gives a good overview: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/09/examining-btrfs-linuxs-perpetually-half-finished-filesystem/ It managed to get into a state where it wouldn’t even let me mount it readonly. I even resorted to running commands of which the documentation just said “only run this if you know what you’re doing”, but actually gave no guidance to understand - it was basically a command for the developer to use and noone else. It ddn’t work anyway. Every other system that was using the same disks but with ext4 on their filesystems came back and I was able to fsck them and continue on. I think they’re all still running without issue 6 years later.

          For such an old file system, it has a lot of braindead design choices and a huge amount of unreliability.

          • Mio@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Dataloss is never fun. File systemet in general need a long time to iron out all the bugs. Hope it is in a better state today. I remember when ext4 was new and crashed in a laptop. Ubuntu was to early to adopt it, or I did not use LTS.

            But as always, make sure to have a proper backup on a different physical location.