# Windows 2008 R2 Integration with Free BSD /ZFS need help/advice.



## heartspeace (May 13, 2010)

SO I have access to most Windows based software free and legal that you would install on a server based system. Looking to install a home based server with enough things to mess around with and work on my skills on different areas under Windows servers, and also act as a backup file system & NAS. May start running exchange on it for a central mail repository etc. However, I really like the advantages of ZFS with FreeBSD, especially their file system robustness, ability to use *nix based applications, etc. If it were a pure NAS I probably would just go FreeBSD - but I want some of both. There are not enough users to warrant a huge system for this (under 5) and we are on a gigabit ethernet system inhouse - minus one computer on 802.11n.

I was wondering if its possible/feasible/smart to maybe set up a virtualized system on a relatively low end system (about the speed of an old Intel Q6700 cpu based system) with Windows as one virtualized server and FreeBSD as the other - but put most of the storage under FreeBSD/ZFS. What I don't know is:

1) Which would be best to run on the bare metal to virtualize these e.g. WIndows 2008 R2 with their vritualization or FreeBSD w/ Xen (or something equiv).

2) Is there a semi-efficient way for the Windows based server to access the Free BSD/ZFS system transparently as mapped drives (not over the network) but using Samba or the like with an internal stacked based system (e.g. maybe looking like going over the net - but really not going over the net and accessing the disk at somewhat close to regular Windows disk access speeds).

3) Best option for a slight upgrade for a robust file system from basically mirroring files on multiple hard drives across machines and using USB backup devices, to backing up the different clients to the main system with a ZFS 3 disk system (e.g. RaidZ) or does that really buy me much rather than having to go with RaidZ3 or higher.

4) Even with ZFS and all its advantages Im leaning towards Windows 2008 R2 for the sheer amount of applications I have access to and run FreeBSD a Linux equiv. without ZFS - and I suspect Windows would do just fine with most things - but hard drives are about to break the 2TB limit - and thus will force without option paritioning of the newer drives (3TB due out this fall).

5) Optimal solution would include support for multiple older size drives in the environment integrated with the above stated goals but this is not a steadfast requirement.

HP


----------



## lesha (May 14, 2010)

I think you probably should setup Win32 on real machine and install Sun VM on it, because Sun VM is really easier in usage...
I had used both Sun VM and Xen, and my mind is that Sun VM is more intended as host software.
Xen may be stronger, but FreeBSD is not best host system...
It is more guest system than host ( by many origins in it's system structure ).


----------



## vermaden (May 14, 2010)

@heartspeace

What about installing FreeBSD as a 'host' system, then add VirtualBox and install Windows 2008 inside a virtual machine, and then add GuestAdditions to have closer to native performance of Windows 2008.

You would have full flexibility about ZFS under FreeBSD and fully working Windows 2008 for all other resources that you need. You may even create MSCS (cluster) of two VirtualBox machines with Windows 2008 inside that FreeBSD system.


----------



## heartspeace (May 14, 2010)

See that's my point, having two response with two solutions both using different host systems. For 1) Is win32 with sunvm really better than server 2008 r2 with hyperv or a *nix based system with one of the virtualization additions or vice versa. I still have to answer the other questions as well.

And now I hear linux may abandon zfs? Very confused about this point. I think freenas said something about it going to linux from freebsd. So now I'm wondering about both's long term usage vs just win 2008 r2 except it still doesn't offer an optimal file system as described I wanted in original message. 

Hp


----------

