On 11/3/2011 1:24 PM, Felipe Scarel wrote: > Reasons to choose ZFS were snapshots, and mainly dedup and compression > capabilities. I know, it's ironic since I'm not able to use them now due to > severe performance issues with them (mostly dedup) turned on. > > I do like the emphasis on data integrity and fast on-the-fly > configurability of ZFS to an extent, but I wouldn't recommend it highly for > new users, especially for production. It works (in fact it's working right > now), but has its fair share of troubles. > > We've started implementations to move our mail system to a more modular > enviroment and we'll probably move away from ZFS. Was a nice experiment > nonetheless, I learned quite a bit from it.
I find this all very interesting... "Please keep in mind the current 0.5.2 stable release does not yet support a mountable filesystem. This functionality is currently available only in the 0.6.0-rc6 release candidate." https://github.com/downloads/zfsonlinux/zfs/zfs-0.6.0-rc6.tar.gz "Uploaded October 14, 2011" So in the past ~two weeks, you converted your 15K+ user production server to ZFS on Linux, as an experiment, and have now decided to change to another filesystem solution, a mere two weeks later? Or am I misinterpreting the date given that 0.6.0-rc6 was released? -- Stan
