Is a Virtualbox FreeNAS VM reliable (with a UPS)? [closed]

I started looking at – Is FreeNAS reliable?
I would have taken issue with TV10’s comment : “longer than a UPS would handle it” (but I don’t yet have a rating high enough to do so).

I am running a trial for this with a laptop (with 2GB mem) running FreeNAS with a USB powered 500GB drive – the laptop gives me some UPS type support, but I lost my zfs disk when FreeNAS hung on a shutdown – the fora all say I need 8GB memory to run ZFS reliably, so I am now using UFS for now.

I am looking to buy a small FSP UPS and add memory to my office sever PC (running Ubuntu), but run FreeNAS in a Virtualbox VM – with scripts triggered by the UPS (via “Network UPS Tools” (NUT)) to shutdown FreeNAS and then the host PC. So the UPS just needs to keep it all up long enough for a clean shutdown… FreeNAS will give me the NAS function, which will synced overnight with disk on the host server, and backed up from there. I want to run some other functions on the host, and would rather not have to go that in jails on a host FreeNAS.

I plan on committing 8GB mem to the VM, with about 2TB zfs disk/s (maybe with raid-1).

Has anyone advice setting this up?

  • I accept that VirtualBox is an overhead, and complexity, that I do not need to add.
    • I do not fully accept that VirtualBox iself is a problem though, as I have used it for some time without issue (even recovering a Windows VM from a backup VDI file, when Windows caused a corruption…) – but that was not my main question here.
  • I also accept that I can add Network UPS Tools (NUT) and Samba to my base Ubuntu system to acheive the NAS results I desire.
  • An ext4 filesystem may be ok, but ZFS on Ubuntu is work me looking at for snapshots and software RAID options.

Thank you all for your input,


Adding a layer of FreeNAS inside of VirtualBox will not make your configuration more reliable, given your reason for not wanting to use Ubuntu.

With regard to UPS functions, I prefer to keep them as close to bare-metal as possible. In this case, your Ubuntu host system should handle that. In reality, I don’t bother with UPS integration much anymore, since it’s easy to plan for the requisite runtime with today’s batteries (plenty of opportunity to manually halt systems).

  • Does your area have a history of unstable power?
  • How much runtime do you need?
  • Are other things in the network battery-protected?

The rest of the configuration sounds unnecessarily complex. If you have RAID on your local server’s disks, it makes sense to just use those without the overhead of virtualization and the complications of ZFS (doing ZFS the right way requires planning). The proposed plan sounds less stable/reliable and will perform worse than just extending the functions on Ubuntu.

Source : Link , Question Author : irdroid3 , Answer Author : ewwhite

Leave a Comment