Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Sep 2013 22:04 UTC, submitted by garyd
General Development

ZFS is the world's most advanced filesystem, in active development for over a decade. Recent development has continued in the open, and OpenZFS is the new formal name for this open community of developers, users, and companies improving, using, and building on ZFS. Founded by members of the Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, and illumos communities, including Matt Ahrens, one of the two original authors of ZFS, the OpenZFS community brings together over a hundred software developers from these platforms.

ZFS plays a major role in Solaris, of course, but beyond that, has it found other major homes? In fact, now that we're at it, how is Solaris doing anyway?

Thread beginning with comment 572778
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Solaris is doing well
by Kebabbert on Sun 22nd Sep 2013 14:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Solaris is doing well"
Kebabbert
Member since:
2007-07-27

"SMP servers have worst case latency of a few 100ns, so you program clusters totally different from a true SMP server. An SMP server is just an ordinary server, and you dont need to redesign your software, just program as normal. Just copy your normal binaries to the SMP server and run it. If you try to copy normal binaries to a HPC cluster, it will not work because you need to redesign software so data is close to adjacent nodes, etc - otherwise performance will be very bad.


SMP does not scale to any appreciable core count. In fact, on individual CPUs with large core counts (like the 16-core Interlagos Opterons) you will find that certain cores will be in one memory region, and other cores will be in other regions, and you need to concern yourself with this fact if you want to write code that makes optimal use of the chip. I also fail to see how something can have "features of NUMA". Either all CPUs can access memory at a latency that is unaffected by which address you are accessing, or the latency/access time is dependent on which region of memory you access, and it's a NUMA machine. You said yourself that these Sparc "SMP" machines have different latencies depending on which memory region you access, which would imply that you do need to worry about NUMA issues on one of these machines if you really wish to get top performance.
"
Yes, all modern SMP servers are somewhat NUMA, read my post above on the new Oracle M6 server. The point is that there is a huge difference in programming when worst case memory latency is a few 100ns, or 10.000ns. The latter must be treated as a cluster.


Also, given that these are hardware/architectural issues, I fail to see what the choice of operating system is, or what exactly prevents Linux from being useful in this scenario. The choice of Solaris probably has more to do with vendor lock-in and the fact that Solaris has been optimized for Sparc since before Linux even existed...

Benchmarks show that Linux has problems utilizing all cpus well, on as few as 8-sockets. Which is to be expected because there does not exist any larger Linux servers than 8 sockets. 8-socket servers are on the verge of what Linux can handle. Or do you mean that Linux would scale well even on 32 socket servers, when it had not even been tested nor optimized for such servers?

So we all agree that Linux can not scale well, when it stops at 8-sockets?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Solaris is doing well
by Alfman on Sun 22nd Sep 2013 17:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Solaris is doing well"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Kebabbert,

"So we all agree that Linux can not scale well, when it stops at 8-sockets?"

Absolutely not. You really shouldn't expect to convince others with this kind of logic. In the absence of evidence, I could say anything I wanted, but it doesn't make it true.

I can appreciate your opinion and insights, but you go too far when you try asserting things as fact when you admit that you haven't seen any data.


Here's a benchmark for postgre 9.2 that shows almost linear scaling up to 64 cores with linux 3.2. It's not solaris/oracle, but it does prove that linux can scale for well tuned databases (note the major bottleneck with postgre 9.1).


\http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2012/04/did-i-say-32-cores-how-about-64.h...

How would linux do on a 64 *socket* server, I don't know, but I'm sure as heck not going to state my prediction as a fact.

Reply Parent Score: 2