On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 5:20 PM, dick hoogendijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:21:26 +0100 > "Peter Tribble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The *real* common thread is that you need ridiculous amounts >> of memory to get decent performance out of ZFS > > That's FUD. Older systems might not have enough memory, but newer ones > can't hardly be bought with less then 2Gb. Read the specs before you > write such nonsense about "ridiculous" memory amounts.
Hogwash. What is the reasonable minimum? I'm suspecting it's well over 2G. And as for being unable to get machines with less than 2G, just look at Sun's price list - plenty of 1G, and the X2100, Ultra 20, and Ultra 24 all come in 512M configurations. Yes, it's not very smart, but it doesn't just set the target range now but for the working lifetime of the machines, which is at least 3 years. >> bulk of the installed base of machines accessed by users is still >> in the 512M-1G range > > True, buth those systems don't qualify for Vista nor for OpenSolaris, > nor for a good ZFS based system. That's normal. Those machines are old. > Not too old for ancient filesystems and lightweight desktops, but the > -are- too old for modern software. So you're saying that if people want to even try OpenSolaris then they need to throw away their perfectly functional hardware and buy something new? Hardly a strategy for success. 1G is more than enough to run a modern desktop (although heavier use and more apps will drive the requirement up beyond that). (And it's not just a case of looking at the memory in the hardware - as virtualization becomes more and more widely used that memory allocation gets split up into smaller chunks that get allocated to virtual systems.) -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
