On 8/14/09, Tim Gustafson <t...@soe.ucsc.edu> wrote: >> Valid point. I didn't make the clarification that I should >> have. graid3 and gmirror have reached the maturity and >> dedicated to the system, whereas ZFS is still experimental. >> When ZFS is no longer considered experimental, I would expect >> ZFS support in the installer in the same expectation I am >> expecting graid3 and gmirror to be. >> >> It's all about the status of ZFS itself, rather than the fact >> that it works. > > Your point is also valid. However, our experience with ZFS on the boxes > that we have installed it has been nothing but positive since about 7.2, and > Steve Bertrand has also posted that his experiences have been nothing but > positive. I know that ZFS on FreeBSD hasn't gotten a "stable" rating yet, > but it appears to be approaching that level and I don't think putting it in > the installer (and perhaps marking it as "beta") so that more people could > test it and give feedback about bugs and their experiences would be a bad > thing. > > To be clear, ZFS itself is indeed stable - our Solaris file servers are > running it in multi-terabyte configurations on servers that get pounded to > the order of nearly saturating a 1GB LAN link. ZFS is the only file system > in our experience that has suffered no data losses in arrays with more than > one terabyte (knock on wood). All other file systems have failed > disastrously for us in multi-terabyte configurations. So what you're > talking about is not the stability of ZFS itself, but the port of ZFS on > FreeBSD.
Exactly. I've used ZFS once, on the box that could benefit from it most. It's a Dell PowerVault 715n NAS, which runs BSD very solid. i386 Pentium 3 @1GHZ, and 1GB RAM. This is back on 7.0 days, and I haven't run it since. I didn't loose any data, because the data on the ZFS was unimportant data that could be lost. It did freak out and panic when I was copying an ISO to/from it. I know that somewhere in 7.2 there was some tuning recommendations on i386, and that 8.0 has an updated version of ZFS that I will run again to try it out. I don't have any amd64 (none!) systems, so this box has to be tortured to be able to even experiment with ZFS. > >> Does this paint a better picture to you of what I forgot to >> clarify in my original posting? > > Yes, clarity is key. Thanks! :) > > Tim Gustafson > Baskin School of Engineering > UC Santa Cruz > t...@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 > _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
