On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:22 PM, <alexmcwhir...@triadic.us> wrote: > On 2017-03-07 15:34, Karel Gardas wrote: >> >> So if data correctness is your mantra, you don't need whole ZFS for it. > > > ZFS appeals to me for the snapshots / compression type stuff.
Oh, I've mistaken you for OP. >> Well, I've not submitted my code yet >> for the second attempt (first you can find in the archive) since I got >> kind of stuck in rewrite for family/life reasons but I still keep my >> hope on it and also hope it'll be delivered sooner than HAMMER2... > > > HAMMER2 looks good on paper for many reasons, especially the clusters > support. But considering "on paper" is really all we have at the moment, it > will likely be a long time. Either way, it's nice to see soft softraid > development. One of these days i will get around to writing RAID10 and / or > trying to finish up RAID6 if that isn't done by then. RAID10 should be simple. RAID6 is in tree in some form. W.r.t. HAMMER2/ZFS as a ZFS user using ZFS solely for more than 10 years already, I'm not so keen anymore about COW due to fragmentation. Otherwise snapshots are nice, but I'd rather snapshots to be added to ffs in not-so-optimal form and whole fs behaving nicely than having nice snapshots in ZFS and whole fs killed perf-wise by fragmentation.
