Is zfs in kernel space yet? or still user land only?

I'd definitely use zfs in BSD or solaris without hesitation over LVM.

Not sure about Mac - not familiar with the native FS for that space at all
- though I have no doubt one could install zfs without too much hassle.

On 24 May 2018 at 16:48, Craig Sanders via luv-main <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 03:38:15PM +1000, Paul van den Bergen wrote:
> > I currently take the approach that unless I have specific IO needs for a
> > volume, I will work with one partition for OS and data as it is the most
> > efficient use of disk space.
>
> This is true for standard partitioning, or LVM logical volumes.  It's not
> true for either btrfs or zfs.  Disk usage efficiency for them is completely
> unaffected by using multiple sub-volumes/datasets.
>
> With partitions or LVs you have to decide how big you want them at the time
> you create them.  Changing their size is a moderately complicated task -
> not
> terribly difficult once you know how to do it, but it does require care and
> attention to detail to ensure you don't screw it up. and depending on the
> filesystem the partition or LV is formatted with, you may be restricted to
> only growing the partition, never shrinking it (which makes, e.g.,
> shrinking
> /home to grow / even more of a PITA)
>
> With sub-volumes on btrfs and datasets on zfs, they just share space on the
> entire pool. Unless you set entirely optional quotas or reservations, you
> will
> never have to resize anything.  And if you do set a quota or reservation,
> it's trivially easy and risk-free to change them at any time...they're
> "soft"
> limits, not hard.
>
> I used to do one big partition for everything - same as you, for the same
> reason.  Now I use zfs datasets so that I can enable different attributes
> (like compression type, acl types, quotas, recordsize, etc) for specific
> needs - e.g. mysql and postgres perform better if their files are stored
> on a
> dataset where the recordsize is 8K rather than the ZFS default of 128K. And
> systemd's journald complains if it can't use posix acls, so I'm getting
> into
> the habit of setting 'acltype=posixacl' and 'xattr=sa' on /var/log for my
> zfs
> machines.  And using gzip rather than lz4 for /var/log too.  Videos, music,
> and deb files are already compressed so their datasets have
> 'compression=off'.
>
>
> Having /home and /var and other directories separated from / is useful -
> but
> in the old days of fixed partition sizes, it just wasn't worth the hassle
> or the risk of running out of space on one partition while there's plenty
> available on other partitions. Now it's no hassle or risk at all.
>
> > synology takes the first slice (~2-3GB) of every disk in the device and
> > makes a RAID 1 volume for the operating system, then does the same with
> the
> > second slice to make a swap partition.  You can lose all but one disk and
> > still have a bootable working machine.  the rest of the disk is available
> > to make volumes out of.
>
> yep, this is a good idea.  it's similar to what I do on all my machines.
>
>
> craig
>
> --
> craig sanders <[email protected]>
> _______________________________________________
> luv-main mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main
>



-- 
Dr Paul van den Bergen
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to