Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th Feb 2008 20:59 UTC, submitted by Oliver
FreeBSD "FreeBSD is back to its incredible performance and now can take advantage of multi-core/CPUs systems very well... So well that some benchmarks on both Intel and AMD systems showed release 7.0 being faster than Linux 2.6 when running PostreSQL or MySQL. Federico Biancuzzi interviewed two dozen developers to discuss all the cool details of FreeBSD 7.0: networking and SMP performance, SCTP support, the new IPSEC stack, virtualization, monitoring frameworks, ports, storage limits and a new journaling facility, what changed in the accounting file format, jemalloc(), ULE, and more."
Thread beginning with comment 302490
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ZFS
by evert on Tue 26th Feb 2008 23:33 UTC
evert
Member since:
2005-07-06

The main reason for me to try FreeBSD would be ZFS. The question remains: how solid and mature is ZFS support in FreeBSD?

It's their first production version with ZFS support. Would it be a better choice to try a OpenSolaris distro or not? Most OpenSolaris distros are not mature in other respects.

Comments from people with some experience in this field would be welcome!

Reply Score: 1

RE: ZFS
by 10wattmindtrip on Tue 26th Feb 2008 23:39 in reply to "ZFS"
10wattmindtrip Member since:
2007-04-01

My experience with ZFS on FreeBSD has been really really good. I haven't found any problems as of yet. I recommend trying it out.
FreeBSD 7 has introduced a huge number of improvements. You really can't appreciate it until you install it on your system and watch it work for yourself. It's truly a big step forward.
Awesome work to FreeBSD Team.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ZFS
by Doc Pain on Wed 27th Feb 2008 11:16 in reply to "RE: ZFS"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

The article is really informative, I recommend reading it to anyone who is interested in the development of FreeBSD, bot also to users wo would ask: "Why should I try it?"

My experience with ZFS on FreeBSD has been really really good. I haven't found any problems as of yet.


I'm interested in how can ZFS data be accessed in cases of emergency (rescue system, maintenance operations); with UFS storage partitions, I didn't have any problems using linve system CDs (based upon FreeBSD) or the rescue system on the / partition. The features of ZFS are really cool and would be an improvement over the traditional way of partitioning in FreeBSD.

NB: While everything works, it's okay. But only in the case of a failure you can see how valueable your tools are.

I recommend trying it out.


I fear I'm note brave enough to try it on my production systems... :-)

FreeBSD 7 has introduced a huge number of improvements. You really can't appreciate it until you install it on your system and watch it work for yourself. It's truly a big step forward.


Whenever FreeBSD offers a new release, I'm happy that it is my main OS (next to Solaris), I use it on servers and desktops since the days of 4.0. Every release gives a speed improvement on the same (!) hardware, something that I'm really missing on non-BSD OSes. Stability, easyness of use, userfriendlyness, the tidy system architecture and of course the excellent documentation (manpages, handbook, comments in sources) are really appealing to me.

Many thanks, FreeBSD developers, you saved me from complete madness. :-)

As soon as 7.0-RELEASE is out, I'm sure I'll install permanent systems to replace older (but flawlessly working) 5.x and 6.x systems.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: ZFS
by Oliver on Wed 27th Feb 2008 00:32 in reply to "ZFS"
Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

ZFS is an experimental feature in FreeBSD 7.0R.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: ZFS
by KugelKurt on Wed 27th Feb 2008 00:51 in reply to "ZFS"
KugelKurt Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't think that Solaris XDE http://developers.sun.com/sxde/ is immature.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: ZFS
by Luminair on Wed 27th Feb 2008 14:38 in reply to "ZFS"
Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

It isn't marked "experimental" for fun. Only a handful of people have tested it, and there are plenty of problems that they run into and have to work around. If you want to be an experimental/alpha tester, go for it.

But if you want to try a ZFS that is known to be pretty stable, try Nexenta Core or the OpenSolaris Project Indiana Developer Preview 2 LiveCD.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ZFS
by MaxKlokan on Wed 27th Feb 2008 16:35 in reply to "RE: ZFS"
MaxKlokan Member since:
2007-12-04

But if you want to try a ZFS that is known to be pretty stable, try Nexenta Core or the OpenSolaris Project Indiana Developer Preview 2 LiveCD.

You could also try Solaris.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: ZFS
by Oliver on Wed 27th Feb 2008 19:13 in reply to "RE: ZFS"
Oliver Member since:
2006-07-15

>Nexenta Core

Yes because of 1.0 it's mature. There is some difference between hype and honesty. The latter you'll find with *BSD. Furthermore it's no secret, that even in Solaris ZFS has got some problems, especially with pools. Last not least ZFS _is_ a WIP project at Sun.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: ZFS
by tankist on Wed 27th Feb 2008 18:17 in reply to "ZFS"
tankist Member since:
2007-01-19

ZFS is marked as an experimental feature in 7.0. There were reports of having to tune up ZFS configuration on i386, otherwise kernel may run out of memory and panic. A general recommendation was to use amd64 platform (with enough memory) rather than i386.

Reply Parent Score: 1