5 ms·

I've been hearing awesome things about ZFS for years now. Unfortunately, it can never be part of the Linux kernel due to licensing issues, so we're stuck with "

by kijin 14y ago

I've been hearing awesome things about ZFS for years now. Unfortunately, it can never be part of the Linux kernel due to licensing issues, so we're stuck with "your 1's and 0's are being held by a pre-1.0 version of a filesystem invented by a dead company". How far has btrfs come in its support of ZFS-like features? Still need a few more years? I'll be switching as soon as it's marked stable. I wonder if the performance might be better if a good 16GB USB stick was used for the OS drive instead of an old laptop drive? The OS needs a lot of random access, but doesn't take up much space. I also wonder why the author went with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS instead of 12.04 LTS, which would give him two more years of peace of mind. It's been a few weeks since 12.04 came out, so it's pretty stable. It does get kernel updates more often that I'd prefer, though, and GNOME 2 is gone.

inportb 14y ago
Actually, 12.04.1 comes out on August 23rd, and LTS users are encouraged to upgrade to the first point release (which would presumably have some useful fixes). Indeed, update-manager tells you that there is no upgrade available if you tell it to look for LTS releases only. My dev machines are running 12.04, though, and haven't run into any major issues yet (knock on wood); my daily driver netbook runs 12.10 because I like it like that.
Nux 14y ago
I also wonder why he didn't go for Centos which would give him 10 years of peace of mind.
- maccam94 14y ago
  Probably because there isn't a handy YUM repository for installing ZFS support.
flatline3 14y ago
FreeBSD ships with ZFS in their standard kernel, and has for years, if you're willing to consider an OS other than Linux.
- sgt 14y ago
  I'm using FreeBSD and ZFS in production, for years now. Very happy with it and it's rock stable.
sho_hn 14y ago
I find your assessment of the Linux filesystem situation to be inaccurately, and surprisingly, negative. "Stuck with" implies little potential for change, when there are several filesystems which are being developed at a swift pace, solving tough problems with vigor and ingenuity. btrfs is coming along just fine. I can't think of any place with more filesystem development going on than Linux. I mean, let's just not leave it at idle claims: btrfs changes in 3.4: http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-556161b206bf626d6c84f9973dbdc3c8ef15bd07 http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-556161b206bf626d6... 3.3: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-1f03b4babafb1049bea35793c2c0fb91fae48cd4 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-1f03b4babafb1049bea3... 3.2: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.2#head-f0a922e9c0ce6f48810dbe204f89a69eab8034eb http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.2#head-f0a922e9c0ce6f48810d... 3.0: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.0#head-3e596e03408e1d32a7cc381d6f54e87feee22ee4 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.0#head-3e596e03408e1d32a7cc... RAID5/6 barely missed 3.5, but should be in the pull request for 3.6 (other changes for 3.5: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/1/160 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/1/160). What's going on in XFS: http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/ http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/ Coverage from the 2012 filesystem/storage summit, day 1: http://lwn.net/Articles/490114/ http://lwn.net/Articles/490114/ Day 2: http://lwn.net/Articles/490501/ http://lwn.net/Articles/490501/ 2011 summit, day 1: http://lwn.net/Articles/436871/ http://lwn.net/Articles/436871/ Day 2: http://lwn.net/Articles/437066/ http://lwn.net/Articles/437066/ Ext4 is still pretty active for a "done" filesystem, too: The last 12 months saw work on online resizing, support for bigger block sizes, a cleanup of mount options, ...
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- kijin 14y ago
  Sorry if I came across as negative. The "stuck with" was a reference to ZFS's status as a pre-1.0 PPA, not a reference to Linux filesystems as a whole. On the other hand, the only in-kernel Linux filesystem that can match ZFS's feature set (for example, resizing a RAID array while the filesystem is online) seems to be btrfs, which probably won't be marked stable for at least another year or two. The latest developments to XFS and ext4, though interesting, aren't particularly relevant if you're looking to build a server like what the article describes. Still, thanks for the many interesting links!
dfc 14y ago
"GNOME 2 is gone." Who cares? It is a file server not a desktop machine.
benmccann 14y ago
Fedora is the first distro trying to include Btrfs by default. We'll see if they make that happen in their December release of Fedora 18.
abruzzi 14y ago
since it is a server--not a desktop, there is less need for the odd linux app. For that reason, I bought a used Ultra 40 for $200, and run Solaris 11. Its fast, rock solid, and free. My current uptime is over 9 months. The only negative with Solaris is the lack of every last odd linux app. The only negative with ZFS in a home environment is inability to grow the number devices in a RAID Z.

by kijin 14y ago

inportb 14y ago

Actually, 12.04.1 comes out on August 23rd, and LTS users are encouraged to upgrade to the first point release (which would presumably have some useful fixes). Indeed, update-manager tells you that there is no upgrade available if you tell it to look for LTS releases only. My dev machines are running 12.04, though, and haven't run into any major issues yet (knock on wood); my daily driver netbook runs 12.10 because I like it like that.

Nux 14y ago

I also wonder why he didn't go for Centos which would give him 10 years of peace of mind.

maccam94 14y ago
Probably because there isn't a handy YUM repository for installing ZFS support.

flatline3 14y ago

FreeBSD ships with ZFS in their standard kernel, and has for years, if you're willing to consider an OS other than Linux.

sgt 14y ago
I'm using FreeBSD and ZFS in production, for years now. Very happy with it and it's rock stable.

sho_hn 14y ago

I find your assessment of the Linux filesystem situation to be inaccurately, and surprisingly, negative. "Stuck with" implies little potential for change, when there are several filesystems which are being developed at a swift pace, solving tough problems with vigor and ingenuity. btrfs is coming along just fine. I can't think of any place with more filesystem development going on than Linux. I mean, let's just not leave it at idle claims: btrfs changes in 3.4: http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-556161b206bf626d6c84f9973dbdc3c8ef15bd07 http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-556161b206bf626d6... 3.3: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-1f03b4babafb1049bea35793c2c0fb91fae48cd4 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-1f03b4babafb1049bea3... 3.2: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.2#head-f0a922e9c0ce6f48810dbe204f89a69eab8034eb http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.2#head-f0a922e9c0ce6f48810d... 3.0: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.0#head-3e596e03408e1d32a7cc381d6f54e87feee22ee4 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.0#head-3e596e03408e1d32a7cc... RAID5/6 barely missed 3.5, but should be in the pull request for 3.6 (other changes for 3.5: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/1/160 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/1/160). What's going on in XFS: http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/ http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/ Coverage from the 2012 filesystem/storage summit, day 1: http://lwn.net/Articles/490114/ http://lwn.net/Articles/490114/ Day 2: http://lwn.net/Articles/490501/ http://lwn.net/Articles/490501/ 2011 summit, day 1: http://lwn.net/Articles/436871/ http://lwn.net/Articles/436871/ Day 2: http://lwn.net/Articles/437066/ http://lwn.net/Articles/437066/ Ext4 is still pretty active for a "done" filesystem, too: The last 12 months saw work on online resizing, support for bigger block sizes, a cleanup of mount options, ...

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
kijin 14y ago
Sorry if I came across as negative. The "stuck with" was a reference to ZFS's status as a pre-1.0 PPA, not a reference to Linux filesystems as a whole. On the other hand, the only in-kernel Linux filesystem that can match ZFS's feature set (for example, resizing a RAID array while the filesystem is online) seems to be btrfs, which probably won't be marked stable for at least another year or two. The latest developments to XFS and ext4, though interesting, aren't particularly relevant if you're looking to build a server like what the article describes. Still, thanks for the many interesting links!

dfc 14y ago

"GNOME 2 is gone." Who cares? It is a file server not a desktop machine.

benmccann 14y ago

Fedora is the first distro trying to include Btrfs by default. We'll see if they make that happen in their December release of Fedora 18.

abruzzi 14y ago

since it is a server--not a desktop, there is less need for the odd linux app. For that reason, I bought a used Ultra 40 for $200, and run Solaris 11. Its fast, rock solid, and free. My current uptime is over 9 months. The only negative with Solaris is the lack of every last odd linux app. The only negative with ZFS in a home environment is inability to grow the number devices in a RAID Z.