4 ms·

Anyone using ZFS with Ubuntu? Any problems? Anyone tried btfs?

by Siecje 10y ago

acranox 10y ago
ZFS? Yes, many people. I'm sure you can read lots about it. I've been using it for over 6 months with no problem.
simosx 10y ago
If you use LXD in Ubuntu, you can (and should) have your containers stored in the ZFS filesystem. I have be doing that, and did not notice any problems. About LXD: https://stgraber.org/2016/03/11/lxd-2-0-blog-post-series-012/ https://stgraber.org/2016/03/11/lxd-2-0-blog-post-series-012...
sp332 10y ago
I ran with BTRFS for a while. It was pretty nice overall, but you have to be aware of which features are production-ready and which ones aren't. And the wiki isn't up to date either. I had to ask questions in the IRC channel because I didn't feel like wading through mailing list archives which is apparently the only place up-to-date info gets written down. Edit: This is new. https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status I was hoping that it would grow into a more stable, user-friendly project. But RAID1 was broken for months, it would let you create RAID5/6 volume even though the feature wasn't even finished yet, and I personally ended up with a filesystem that will crash the kernel when I try to read certain files. I recovered most of the data using a virtual machine that I could reboot quickly. Maybe I'll look at it again in a couple years, see if someone is taking the project seriously.
luca_ing 10y ago
I've been using ZFS on all my desktops and my personal NAS for, I can't remember, probably 4-5 years. Including ZFS root filesystem, and swap on a zvol. I have to say, I really like it, and I'll use it again if I have to redo a machine. Installing Ubuntu on a ZFS root filesystem is much more involved than merely running the installer. If you have never done it before, and are appropriately cautious, it'll take you half a day to follow the (very detailed and helpful) Wiki page. I can do it in less than an hour now. ----- So far, only one problem (and not a bug, more of a misfeature): when one of the disks in the NAS died, I couldn't replace it with a new one, because the ZFS mirroring was using its default 2kb blocks (I forget the correct term). It can only do this on 2kb/sector HDDs. My new HDD had 4kb/sector. I was forced to recreate the entire filesystem using a larger blocksize (ashift=12). Luckily this worked without a hitch, thanks also to zfs send | zfs receive, but it still pissed me off.
alyandon 10y ago
I've been using btrfs in non-redundant and "raid1" (really just chunk duplication) setups for a while now. I've not had any major problems in managing the data pools or catastrophic data loss. In fact, btrfs checksums detected corruption that I isolated to a bad ram module on one of my machines that went undetected on ext4. At this point I'm sticking with btrfs instead of going with zfs because of the flexibility for growing/shrinking volumes and adding/removing devices in a non-destructive manner.
jlgaddis 10y ago
Yep, been using "ZFS on root" (with multiple pools) for a couple of months now on a new workstation. No major issues to report and no minor issues that I can recall.
willtim 10y ago
I've been using ZFS on Linux for the past year on a home server. It has worked beautifully and is very simple to use. More importantly it is considered stable. I would certainly not trust btrfs with my data, it simply isn't finished and at this point may never be.

Anyone using ZFS with Ubuntu? Any problems? Anyone tried btfs?

by Siecje 10y ago

Anyone using ZFS with Ubuntu? Any problems? Anyone tried btfs?

acranox 10y ago

ZFS? Yes, many people. I'm sure you can read lots about it. I've been using it for over 6 months with no problem.

simosx 10y ago

If you use LXD in Ubuntu, you can (and should) have your containers stored in the ZFS filesystem. I have be doing that, and did not notice any problems. About LXD: https://stgraber.org/2016/03/11/lxd-2-0-blog-post-series-012/ https://stgraber.org/2016/03/11/lxd-2-0-blog-post-series-012...

sp332 10y ago

I ran with BTRFS for a while. It was pretty nice overall, but you have to be aware of which features are production-ready and which ones aren't. And the wiki isn't up to date either. I had to ask questions in the IRC channel because I didn't feel like wading through mailing list archives which is apparently the only place up-to-date info gets written down. Edit: This is new. https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status I was hoping that it would grow into a more stable, user-friendly project. But RAID1 was broken for months, it would let you create RAID5/6 volume even though the feature wasn't even finished yet, and I personally ended up with a filesystem that will crash the kernel when I try to read certain files. I recovered most of the data using a virtual machine that I could reboot quickly. Maybe I'll look at it again in a couple years, see if someone is taking the project seriously.

luca_ing 10y ago

I've been using ZFS on all my desktops and my personal NAS for, I can't remember, probably 4-5 years. Including ZFS root filesystem, and swap on a zvol. I have to say, I really like it, and I'll use it again if I have to redo a machine. Installing Ubuntu on a ZFS root filesystem is much more involved than merely running the installer. If you have never done it before, and are appropriately cautious, it'll take you half a day to follow the (very detailed and helpful) Wiki page. I can do it in less than an hour now. ----- So far, only one problem (and not a bug, more of a misfeature): when one of the disks in the NAS died, I couldn't replace it with a new one, because the ZFS mirroring was using its default 2kb blocks (I forget the correct term). It can only do this on 2kb/sector HDDs. My new HDD had 4kb/sector. I was forced to recreate the entire filesystem using a larger blocksize (ashift=12). Luckily this worked without a hitch, thanks also to zfs send | zfs receive, but it still pissed me off.

alyandon 10y ago

I've been using btrfs in non-redundant and "raid1" (really just chunk duplication) setups for a while now. I've not had any major problems in managing the data pools or catastrophic data loss. In fact, btrfs checksums detected corruption that I isolated to a bad ram module on one of my machines that went undetected on ext4. At this point I'm sticking with btrfs instead of going with zfs because of the flexibility for growing/shrinking volumes and adding/removing devices in a non-destructive manner.

jlgaddis 10y ago

Yep, been using "ZFS on root" (with multiple pools) for a couple of months now on a new workstation. No major issues to report and no minor issues that I can recall.

willtim 10y ago

I've been using ZFS on Linux for the past year on a home server. It has worked beautifully and is very simple to use. More importantly it is considered stable. I would certainly not trust btrfs with my data, it simply isn't finished and at this point may never be.