Linked by Robert Escue on Wed 4th Jun 2008 05:06 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 317438
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.





Member since:
2006-05-13
Yep, it not only has bugs, but under load, the runQ is a lot longer and the %sy vs. %us is higher (sy is a LOT higher) when compared to UFS under the same loads.
So what you get is more time spent coddling the file system, and you're getting it wrong.
Thanks. Now if Sun wants ZFS to save the company, fix it up. In the meantime, while we still have to use UFS, can Sun please put the UFS over 1TB block size to something less than 1048576. Maybe 16384 or 32768. That would be a good compromise.