Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 18th May 2008 15:32 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris It seems like we're really on the subject of filesystems and related technology the past few days. We had an interview with the man behind BeServed, an item on WinFS' current status, and now we - possibly - have news on ZFS coming to Linux. Possibly, because it's all speculation from here on out.
Thread beginning with comment 314715
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by sonic2000gr
by sonic2000gr on Sun 18th May 2008 16:10 UTC
sonic2000gr
Member since:
2007-05-20

It is also being pointed out that FreeBSD and Mac OS X already have ZFS, and that "the world hasn't fallen apart just yet."


And there is good reason for that! I don't know about the status of ZFS in MacOSX, but in FreeBSD it is yet an experimental feature. It has been suggested that it works best on 64bit systems with 2Gb or more RAM. At this point I believe few people know how to implement it, and even fewer will have any actual benefit from it. The rest of us are simply waiting for it to become mainstream. If it gets adopted by Linux, it will not take too long before everyone gets it.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by sonic2000gr
by Robert Escue on Sun 18th May 2008 16:22 in reply to "Comment by sonic2000gr"
Robert Escue Member since:
2005-07-08

Then you might want to read this comment about ZFS on BSD:

http://kerneltrap.org/FreeBSD/ZFS_Stability

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE: Comment by sonic2000gr
by Oliver on Sun 18th May 2008 16:25 in reply to "Comment by sonic2000gr"
RE[2]: Comment by sonic2000gr
by Formel1Hund on Sun 18th May 2008 16:49 in reply to "RE: Comment by sonic2000gr"
Formel1Hund Member since:
2005-10-23

>>but in FreeBSD it is yet an experimental feature.

>So what? Linux doesn't care anything about quality, they would mark it stable at once.
Linux is a kernel, can it care ?

>>that it works best on 64bit systems with 2Gb or more RAM

>It's for server, not for the desktop.
Oh, that's why Sun made It the default for Opensolaris.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Comment by sonic2000gr
by modmans2ndcoming on Sun 18th May 2008 16:34 in reply to "Comment by sonic2000gr"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

A cloud storage system is useless to most people? that is so funny.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by sonic2000gr
by sonic2000gr on Sun 18th May 2008 17:19 in reply to "RE: Comment by sonic2000gr"
sonic2000gr Member since:
2007-05-20

A cloud storage system is useless to most people? that is so funny.


It is, if I need a 64 bit OS, 4G RAM and the "experimental" tag above my head. I will stick to what works, until this is ready, thanks.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by sonic2000gr
by diegocg on Sun 18th May 2008 17:41 in reply to "RE: Comment by sonic2000gr"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

It is, the ZFS features are great for admins, datacenters and users who know what they are doing. For Joe user they are mostly useless...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by sonic2000gr
by phoenix on Mon 19th May 2008 03:08 in reply to "Comment by sonic2000gr"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

"It is also being pointed out that FreeBSD and Mac OS X already have ZFS, and that "the world hasn't fallen apart just yet."


And there is good reason for that! I don't know about the status of ZFS in MacOSX, but in FreeBSD it is yet an experimental feature. It has been suggested that it works best on 64bit systems with 2Gb or more RAM.
"

You can use it just fine on 32-bit systems. You just have to tune it and the kernel correctly. Adding "vfs.zfs.arc_max" (set to between 1/3 and 1/2 of your RAM) and "vfs.zfs.prefetch_disable" (set to 1) will handle most of the known issues with running ZFS on FreeBSD 7.0 and 7-STABLE.

Other things that can be tuned are listed in the ZFS Tuning Guide on the FreeBSD wiki.

Having more than 1 GB of RAM available does make it run smoother, but several people are running it with only 512 MB of RAM.

Granted, it's not perfect, and there are some issues. But it's not the train wreck that people make it out to be.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by sonic2000gr
by sonic2000gr on Mon 19th May 2008 05:42 in reply to "RE: Comment by sonic2000gr"
sonic2000gr Member since:
2007-05-20

Granted, it's not perfect, and there are some issues. But it's not the train wreck that people make it out to be.


If it was a train wreck, it wouldn't be in FreeBSD AT ALL ;)
I will wait until things clear up though. At this moment using ZFS is simply not justified on my systems. But it will be a nice "toy" for me on the next release.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by sonic2000gr
by jhoo on Mon 19th May 2008 16:27 in reply to "Comment by sonic2000gr"
jhoo Member since:
2006-03-24

>> works best on 64bit systems with 2Gb or more RAM.

Most 64-bit systems have more than 250MB of RAM.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by sonic2000gr
by chrish on Tue 20th May 2008 13:19 in reply to "Comment by sonic2000gr"
chrish Member since:
2005-07-14

I'm running FreeBSD 7 with ZFS (best... filesystem... EVER) on a dual P2 350MHz machine with 512MB of RAM.

I've seen 2-3 filesystem-related panics and sometimes the ZFS will deadlock, resulting in a hung filesystem until I reboot the system (a former BeOS development machine).

That said, I knew it was "experimental" still when I started using it. The benefits have outweighed the issues... it's only a home file/print server, if it hangs it's not a big deal.

Having 1GB or more of RAM on a server system isn't a ridiculous requirement these days, although it has been hard for me to find some additional RAM for this box. :-P

Reply Parent Score: 1