Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Oct 2006 20:56 UTC
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris "When eWEEK Labs first reviewed Sun Microsystems' Solaris 10 early last year, we were impressed by the new facilities the operating system offered for better serving up applications and making the most of the SPARC and x86 hardware on which it runs. With this summer's Solaris 10 update, labeled 6/06, Sun has significantly improved on its already excellent operating system with the addition of the much-heralded Zettabyte File System."
Thread beginning with comment 175191
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: ZFS vs. LVM+JFS2
by ptman on Wed 25th Oct 2006 14:06 UTC in reply to "ZFS vs. LVM+JFS2"
ptman
Member since:
2005-08-08

For one, it's just ZFS instead of LVM and a file system. It's integrated, it's easier.

Second, it's got RaidZ. It's supposedly better than e.g. Raid5. I don't know much about it though.

Third, is the cryptographically strong filesystem integrity checking. Raid can recover from a drive dying totally (well, not RAID0), but if the drive is flaky and gives false data, ZFS will detect that _and_ attempt to fix it on the fly.

Fourth, ZFS features cheap and fast filesystem snapshots. I don't know about JFS2 though.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ZFS vs. LVM+JFS2
by chicklin on Wed 25th Oct 2006 14:34 in reply to "RE: ZFS vs. LVM+JFS2"
chicklin Member since:
2006-01-05

> For one, it's just ZFS instead of LVM and a file system. It's integrated, it's easier.

A good point, integration is good. However, on AIX the LVM and FS components are very well integrated from a sysadmin point of view. True, they are separate components, but expanding a filesystem is one operation, creating a new filesystem is one operation, taking a snapshot is one operation. The commands used integrate the LVM and FS steps to do each of those tasks.

> Second, it's got RaidZ. It's supposedly better than e.g. Raid5. I don't know much about it though.

I probably need to read more about RaidZ, but my cursory understanding is that it is basically software RAID, albeit integrated with the FS/LVM layer. I still think I would prefer hardware-based RAID.

> Third, is the cryptographically strong filesystem integrity checking. Raid can recover from a drive dying totally (well, not RAID0), but if the drive is flaky and gives false data, ZFS will detect that _and_ attempt to fix it on the fly.

You may have a good point there. I'm not aware of that capability in JFS.

> Fourth, ZFS features cheap and fast filesystem snapshots. I don't know about JFS2 though.

JFS2 can do snapshots quickly and without much disk space. I think it's pretty much implemented the same way UFS snapshots are on FreeBSD. Could be wrong about that, though.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: ZFS vs. LVM+JFS2
by whartung on Wed 25th Oct 2006 17:00 in reply to "RE[2]: ZFS vs. LVM+JFS2"
whartung Member since:
2005-07-06

#3, the integrity checking, is very important as it helps detect "silent" corruption happening on a disk drive, say from a flaky controller, and gives the system opportunities for correction, but minimally it provides notification. Effectively, ZFS is running and tracking checksums at the block level.

The more front facing benefit from an admin point of view is simply that the ZFS command line is REALLY simple and easy to use. It's well documented, and almost "intuitive".

To be fair, this is "syntactic sugar", and the IBM admin app (I forget the name not have touched AIX in over 10 years) is certainly easy to use from a "green screen", Curses style application, but from the command line it's not as clean and clear as the ZFS command line. And compared to the de facto VERITAS system that ZFS will most likely place in large scale use, the interface is simply night and day.

I'm really hoping that Apple is looking at ZFS VERY seriously, because I have great confidence that they can make an admin tool and leverage ZFS capabilities to push it to the next level of making it a consumer friendly file system. The "adding a stick of RAM" analogy is very apt to how disk pools are managed, and I think there's great value for consumers to be able to convert a 100G volume in to a contiguous 200G volume with simply slapping in a new hard drive.

Reply Parent Score: 2