4 ms·
I was expecting some more technical proof, benchmarks or similar. Sadly, this post reads as a pure advertisement piece to use OpenZFS. What should i take away
by buster 7y ago
I was expecting some more technical proof, benchmarks or similar.
Sadly, this post reads as a pure advertisement piece to use OpenZFS.
What should i take away in this sentence? "XFS is optimized for huge files and for parallel I/O this makes it the easier choice for use cases like NASA Advanced Supercomputing Division." The whole post sounds like "ZFS is the superior technology with much more bells and whistles and XFS is old tech but XFS is what you choose if you're the NASA..".
Having interest in XFS/ZFS/BTRFS and what to choose on my machines, i was hoping for some more substantial and objective facts.
- ahje 7y agoYeah, I expected something more substantial. While my personal experience confirms that XFS is more suitable for I/O intensive stuff, it's still nothing more than anectdotal evidence, and it's not indicative for other people's use cases.
- truth_seeker 7y agoIt might not what exactly you are looking for, but i think it's close. MySQL performance bench suite against ZFS vs XFS https://www.percona.com/blog/2018/05/15/about-zfs-performance/ https://www.percona.com/blog/2018/05/15/about-zfs-performanc...