ZFS for Linux ("real soon now")
This file system is more solidly engineered than any other, it seems. Not yet for Linux, but someday?
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051117-5595.html http://linux.inet.hr/zfs_filesystem_for_linux.html http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/
The ext2/3 stuff is really getting old. It's too bad Linux has not incorporated or "clean-roomed" the supremely good fs out there.
M
* Mark 27e3kk302@sneakemail.com [20060916 22:59]:
This file system is more solidly engineered than any other, it seems. Not yet for Linux, but someday?
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051117-5595.html http://linux.inet.hr/zfs_filesystem_for_linux.html http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/
The ext2/3 stuff is really getting old. It's too bad Linux has not incorporated or "clean-roomed" the supremely good fs out there.
http://bulk.fefe.de/lk2006/ http://kerneltrap.org/node/6776 http://www.wizy.org/wiki/ZFS_on_FUSE
regards, -mika-
(yeah I know about ext4 - but kernel folks should develop the kernel, not filesystems, certainly not old ones - i.e. make the kernel more inviting for third-party work)
Good PDF overview slides here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/docs/zfs_last.pdf
RAID comments in here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/whatis/
Disk access / filesystem performance is the greatest bottleneck in PC performance (disk = slowest component). ZFS could make Linux go mach speed. And rid us of fsck forever.
ZFS needs to be kernel. FUSE is user space, a big performance hit. The release of ZFS is huge (in light of point above). The kerneldevs should get ZFS into Linux, whether it means (a) lobbying Sun for GPL, or (b) configuring Linux to allow separately compiled fs stuff (similar to the nvidia drivers). If anything ever argued for bending the "Linux house rules," ZFS is it. One of the few things that makes me want to customize my own Linux kernel. Talk to any Linux sysadmin who moved (down) from Solaris filesystem to Linux filesystems and you'll get an earful about ZFS.
M
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
- --ZFS comments removed---
Sorry, we are not on a road-sales-show here. Local file systems, ok, but I need a stable one with really good support, tools for undelete and access on windows. So ext2/3 local on disks. And it works, really, it is OK!
One step ahead: with all the net access 24/7 around me I really think about using OpenAFS far more than just for dumping my data on server. And for OpenAFS speed is really not everything.
M
MfG, Lars Schimmer - -- - ------------------------------------------------------------- TU Graz, Institut für ComputerGraphik & WissensVisualisierung Tel: +43 316 873-5405 E-Mail: l.schimmer@cgv.tugraz.at Fax: +43 316 873-5402 PGP-Key-ID: 0x4A9B1723
1. You misunderstand what ZFS is and how "stable" it is. That's the attraction. 2. No, this ain't a roadshow, so let's not sell OpenAFS reviving mainframe/terminal days. 3. There were recent grml discussions about file system robustness. ZFS is the ultimate. 4. Sysadmins (folks who use grml) should know about ZFS. It is not out of place here.
Over and out, M
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Mark schrieb am 17.09.2006 03:46:
- You misunderstand what ZFS is and how "stable" it is. That's the
attraction. 2. No, this ain't a roadshow, so let's not sell OpenAFS reviving mainframe/terminal days. 3. There were recent grml discussions about file system robustness. ZFS is the ultimate. 4. Sysadmins (folks who use grml) should know about ZFS. It is not out of place here.
Over and out, M
I am sorry, but what I hear and see from ZFS on Solaris does not raise the slightest wish to migrate my xfs volumes ;-) Some coworkers run servers with Solaris 9 and 10...
I fully agree to your No 4. They should know it. They should not use it (now) ;-)
@Mark: sorry for the PM, noticed too late :-(
Regards, Werner
- -- Werner Flamme, Abt. WKDV UFZ Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle GmbH, Permoserstr. 15 - 04318 Leipzig Tel.: (0341) 235-3921 - Fax (0341) 235-453921 http://www.ufz.de - eMail: werner.flamme@ufz.de
I am sorry, but what I hear and see from ZFS on Solaris does not raise the slightest wish to migrate my xfs volumes ;-) Some coworkers run servers with Solaris 9 and 10...
The existence of XFS makes my point. I hope Linux opens up to more good stuff, instead of retreading ext 2-3-4. Linux filesystems brought down a major worldwide e-mail service last month. They were several days (cough) doing a single fsck on a single disk -- which still did not fix the problem.
http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=387170#post387170 http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=387414#post387414
About XFS and ZFS, http://see.sun.com/Apps/DCS/mcp?q=STI00HTG6Hjxpv
"Antnee (Q): How do you feel that Solaris holds up to the latest release of IRIX? And is it true that ZFS is still inferior to SGIs XFS?
Adam Leventhal (A): Are they still releasing IRIX, and are people still running it? I had no idea. ZFS is far and away superior to XFS."
M
Teilnehmer (4)
-
Lars Schimmer -
Mark -
Michael Prokop -
Werner Flamme