[SOLVED] Seeking advice for installation - LVM-Thin or ZFS

[parknook]

I'm moving from an ESXi to Proxmox setup. The ESXi server is still running and I'll be migrating VM's from that to the new Proxmox box.

Existing ESXi has a large (16tb) drive that contains a lot of files that I will need to migrate to the new box. I have a 20tb drive for the new box plus an SSD as well (SSD will be used as the Proxmox boot disk and directory for ISO's etc) . Basic plan is to migrate from 16 to 20 and then remove 16 from ESXi and install into Proxmox box. Once installed I'd like the 16 and 20 to appear as 1 drive to the associated VM's

I'd like to have the "OS" of the VM's running on the SSD and the storage element on the combined 16/20.

I've been building test setups but not sure which way to go. Proxmox box is totally greenfield - I can rebuild it however I need.

1) Do I use ZFS for the storage element and how easy is it to add in the 20 when I need to? If not ZFS, what could I use to ensure the 16/20 show to VM's as 1 drive?
2) What should I use for the SSD - Ext4 ?

Any other suggestions welcome!

** edit ** I've been reading more this morning and it's looking more and more like I should use LVM-Thin ?

 

[parknook]

I've decided to go LVM-Thin. ZFS could have issues with unexpected power cuts and as this is a home setup it's more a possibility.

 

[UdoB]

I've decided to go LVM-Thin. ZFS could have issues with unexpected power cuts

And you are sure LVM (edit: and the filesystem above that block-device layer) has no problem with power cuts? Is that documented somewhere?

Disclaimer: I have no idea...

 

[parknook]

And you are sure LVM (edit: and the filesystem above that block-device layer) has no problem with power cuts? Is that documented somewhere?

Disclaimer: I have no idea...

All file systems can have problems with power cuts but from what I read ZFS appeared to be more prone to corruption, I think due to caching in memory before writing to disk.

 

[leesteken]

All file systems can have problems with power cuts but from what I read ZFS appeared to be more prone to corruption, I think due to caching in memory before writing to disk.

ZFS (like some others ;ole Btrfs) will detect corruption and therefore might appear to be more susceptible, while others have silent data corruption that goes unnoticed for too long?

(Consumer) SSDs are much more susceptible to power loss than HDDs. They don't have PLP and might lose writes or are busy moving data in the background or trimming and can easily become corrupt or even empty (as the internal memory layout data is lost) A power cut while they are trimming, destroyed a whole filesystem for me once (but after a secure erase it was usable again although empty) .
HDDs (except for maybe the SMR kind) don't manipulate existing data on the discs and can handle power loss much better. Some SSDs even advertise with "existing data is safe" (like the MX500, which calls it partial-PLP or something) as if it is some great feature, which you apparently can no longer expect from modern SSDs.