From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5FB66C853 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C41901DEA8 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.ud08.udmedia.de (ud08.udmedia.de [194.117.254.48]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id D36C01DEA0 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:23 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=aeppelbroe.de; h=from :in-reply-to:references:to:subject:message-id:date:content-type :mime-version; s=k1; bh=24KxMk93Y9kAaa3vBxVyUy6WqBYT103eZ0LOu5oS 7ic=; b=gpnAUCA8FqQ2sWX9Fu5dWD4fU7yHqzQ9shoXyfBqLQ0qHL1NfnjDbf9h sLXEtO9afumHFZsbZaF3P6Oaegy7ou81rreHzzfrmwUCLP2JNv0C+n3TSv5LUWsl 3Po2fhENlETJrIyTbsTAvpU+VWogEHBlE35Y8HZM++lDp8dQfJo= Received: (qmail 193124 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2021 11:34:23 +0200 Received: by mail.ud08.udmedia.de with ESMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 30 Mar 2021 11:34:23 +0200 X-UD-Smtp-Session: ud08?166p2@2ewStL2+S+Jf3hT8 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by baikonur.fritz.box (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE45D2760B for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:22 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at baikonur.orbit.local Received: from baikonur.fritz.box ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (baikonur.fritz.box [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SK_9ceaCS-TK for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from baikonur (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by baikonur.fritz.box (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47D1ED27609 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:22 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: EGroupware API 17.1.007 From: Gregor Burck X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: EGroupware-Mail In-Reply-To: <20210329152820.EGroupware._t1Sneg3e4BsuWUv_4EVNL7@heim.aeppelbroe.de> References: <20210329152820.EGroupware._t1Sneg3e4BsuWUv_4EVNL7@heim.aeppelbroe.de> To: Proxmox VE user list Message-ID: <20210330113422.EGroupware.a1P45RSrE7GVq7erD8GIu2v@heim.aeppelbroe.de> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:22 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 1 AWL 0.236 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DKIM_INVALID 0.1 DKIM or DK signature exists, but is not valid DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid FORGED_SPF_HELO 1 - KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_PASS -0.001 SPF: HELO matches SPF record SPF_NONE 0.001 SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [aeppelbroe.de] Subject: Re: [PVE-User] ZFZ questions - performance and caching X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:34:54 -0000 Hi Mikhail, > How do you plan to setup backup on this server? Are you going to use > Proxmox Backup Server for this, or just plain vzdump files? sure I plan to use PBS for Backup, in our Testsystem it is brilliant ;-) I think, our Setup is quite smaller than yours, I calculate that 16 TB space for Backup is enough, that's three times the volume that we 've used for all VMs complete, and not all VMs are produktive and should have to backuped. The network will be a 10GB too. But I plan to use the Backupserver as Backup Virtualisation System too, so I plan two Raid Pools. For my opinion the Backup Pool could be 'slower'. The Virtualisation Pool should be 'quicker' So I wonder if I should use the Rais Controller for Rais or as HBA and made the Raid over ZFS. HW Raid is conservativ but with ZFS I've no experience. So I've to decide between both models. Bye Gregor