Self-hosting

2760 readers

1 users here now

Hosting your own services. Preferably at home and on low-power or shared hardware.

Also check out:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

ZFS High Availability with Asynchronous Replication and zrep (klarasystems.com)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Describes the zrep script that uses zfs send and receive over network to keep a read-only copy of snapshots up-to-date.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

This looks nice. But I can't see a reason for me to switch away from my current Sanoid/Syncoid setup. It just works too well.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

You can do something similar, but much easier with btrfs and btrbk.

Of course ZFS is even more advanced than btrfs, but unless you are doing professional datacenter level stuff btrfs will likely be sufficient.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

I've been hearing about ZFS and its beneficial features for years now, but mainstream Linux installers don't seem to support it, and I can't be bothered to switch filesystems after installing.

Out of curiosity - can anyone tell, what might be blocking them?

Edit: answering my own question: legal issues. Licenses "potentially aren't compatible".

Due to potential legal incompatibilities between the CDDL and GPL, despite both being OSI-approved free software licenses which comply with DFSG, ZFS development is not supported by the Linux kernel. ZoL is a project funded by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to develop a native Linux kernel module for its massive storage requirements and super computers.

Source: https://wiki.debian.org/ZFS

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

By default it consumes 30% of RAM as cache (ARC). And, we have btrfs now, which is a huge contender "CoW" filesystem for desktop.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Apart from the license incompatibility (which doesn't stop it from being used by distros, as Ubuntu has shown): While it's a fantastic filesystem for servers, it is also resource hungry and not suitable for small or portable systems.