5 ms·

ZFS is probably the biggest reason for me. I have a machine with a zfs pool running samba and nfsd. Philosophically I tend to prefer *BSDs over Linux. I have a

ZFS is probably the biggest reason for me. I have a machine with a zfs pool running samba and nfsd. Philosophically I tend to prefer *BSDs over Linux. I have a few FreeBSD machines, one OpenBSD, and one Linux.

fragmede 2y ago
when do you use samba and when do you use nfsd? any iscsi?
- asveikau 2y ago
  I mainly use NFS. SMB I typically use from Windows or Android. (The latter with the app "andsmb") iSCSI is block layer so I don't find it very useful.
commandersaki 2y ago
Got sick of doing ZFS on Arch Linux and lagging behind on new kernel releases. Switched to bcachefs (only for my laptop) which has the trifecta of data and metadata checksumming, compression, and encryption. It's also just simpler to use.
0x457 2y ago
> ZFS is probably the biggest reason for me. Maybe in the past there was an argument for that, but ever since FreeBSD started using OpenZFS implementation...what's the difference? My ideal OS would be something like NixOS, but on FreeBSD and with better language than Nix.
- agapon 2y ago
  ZFS is part of the OS on FreeBSD. Integrated more tightly in every respect.
- bluGill 2y ago
  ZFS is a first class part of FreeBSD. you can use it on linux, but it will always have some rough edges. How rough it open to question though, for some it works well.
  - free652 2y ago
    Well since FreeBSD is pulling ZFS source from Linux, I am not certain what are the rough edges. And I have ran ZFS for 7+ years on Linux with zero issues.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      ZFS is not part of linux. It is a separate project that publishes both to FreeBSD and some shims so you can run it on Linux. FreeBSD pulls and directly integrates it, but for license reasons linux doesn't pull it in directly. Yes the upstream project does have some shims of linux use that they public directly, but FreeBSD is a first class user of that project while the linux shims are a hack that some in the kernel do not want to work.
  - tomxor 2y ago
    Used ZFS on Debian in production for 8 years, yet to experience rough edges but always interested to learn.
    - turtledragonfly 2y ago
      Do you use ZFS for root, on Debian? (enabling "boot environments") I've recently switched my FreeBSD setups to use that scheme, and it's been nice. Would be interested to hear if it's similarly straightforward on Debian (my second-favorite OS :) Obviously requires support in the bootcode; I'm not sure of the state of that for Linux.
      - Numerlor 2y ago
        I've been running zfs on root on my Debian home server, only the install was a tiny bit more involved but it was done in maybe half an hour going off of the guide and trying to understand everything it was doing with 0 experience (... And then did it again after I broke networking after an hour lol)
      - tomxor 2y ago
        No, to be fair I use it for everything except root (which I prefer to backup as IaC, not that I wouldn't use ZFS, it's just not default so requires more effort). I use ZFS datasets to back everything except the OS, including DBs which has been the most satisfying aspect of using ZFS (being able to snapshot live DBs together with all other relevant state rather than a as a separate replication process). While I can't comment on using it for root, I can say for other use, the only annoyance I have is compiling the kernel module on every single update. This is automatically handled by APT, but for very small servers it can be slow... at most ~15 mins. Could be solved with private distribution for a large fleet but I can't be bother with that stuff. Hoping at some point Debian will relax their strict "to the letter of the GPL" attitude at some point like they did with install media drivers. But it's not the worst experience, at least installing is automated.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  > My ideal OS would be something like NixOS, but on FreeBSD and with better language than Nix. Something nicer than nix would be nice, but otherwise perhaps keep an eye on https://github.com/nixos-bsd/nixbsd https://github.com/nixos-bsd/nixbsd
  - 0x457 2y ago
    Yeah, it's acceptable, I want to try to convert my home server to nixbsd.
- xiaoyu2006 2y ago
  My ideal OS (for a server) is Guix, NixOS without Nix-the-language. Sadly no one is packaging for it.
mekster 2y ago
Ubuntu can have zfs with an install of a package. BSD’s inability to utilize docker ecosystem had me decided to stick with Ubuntu for a decade, unless things change and BSD gets clear advantages over Linux.
- nisa 2y ago
  Ubuntu ships an outdated version that misses a lot of bugfixes. They don't seem to be interested in either backporting fixes or shipping the current stable version. Every other day some Ubuntu user hits the ZFS GitHub issues with a problem that was fixed years ago.
  - hedora 2y ago
    After hitting this in production, I will never choose Ubuntu again. On top of the things you mentioned, it’s basically impossible to produce a working playbook that switches from Ubuntu’s garbage package to the upstream ones - systemd wedges badly about 25% of the time, and force disables the zfs units. None of the documented systemd overrides worked. I’m enjoying devuan and openbsd at home.
- asveikau 2y ago
  Here's where I'll show my age. If you got into a unix-like OS in the '90s, the *BSD ergonomics will make more sense. I remember when Ubuntu and docker each entered the scene and my initial impressions of both were pretty negative.
- aaronbaugher 2y ago
  Ubuntu can have ZFS. FreeBSD just does, as long as you select "ZFS on root" for your disk layout when you install. It just works, and then you automatically get things like snapshots and easy rollback during upgrades.

fragmede 2y ago

when do you use samba and when do you use nfsd? any iscsi?

asveikau 2y ago
I mainly use NFS. SMB I typically use from Windows or Android. (The latter with the app "andsmb") iSCSI is block layer so I don't find it very useful.

commandersaki 2y ago

Got sick of doing ZFS on Arch Linux and lagging behind on new kernel releases. Switched to bcachefs (only for my laptop) which has the trifecta of data and metadata checksumming, compression, and encryption. It's also just simpler to use.

0x457 2y ago

> ZFS is probably the biggest reason for me. Maybe in the past there was an argument for that, but ever since FreeBSD started using OpenZFS implementation...what's the difference? My ideal OS would be something like NixOS, but on FreeBSD and with better language than Nix.

agapon 2y ago
ZFS is part of the OS on FreeBSD. Integrated more tightly in every respect.
bluGill 2y ago
ZFS is a first class part of FreeBSD. you can use it on linux, but it will always have some rough edges. How rough it open to question though, for some it works well.
- free652 2y ago
  Well since FreeBSD is pulling ZFS source from Linux, I am not certain what are the rough edges. And I have ran ZFS for 7+ years on Linux with zero issues.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    ZFS is not part of linux. It is a separate project that publishes both to FreeBSD and some shims so you can run it on Linux. FreeBSD pulls and directly integrates it, but for license reasons linux doesn't pull it in directly. Yes the upstream project does have some shims of linux use that they public directly, but FreeBSD is a first class user of that project while the linux shims are a hack that some in the kernel do not want to work.
- tomxor 2y ago
  Used ZFS on Debian in production for 8 years, yet to experience rough edges but always interested to learn.
  - turtledragonfly 2y ago
    Do you use ZFS for root, on Debian? (enabling "boot environments") I've recently switched my FreeBSD setups to use that scheme, and it's been nice. Would be interested to hear if it's similarly straightforward on Debian (my second-favorite OS :) Obviously requires support in the bootcode; I'm not sure of the state of that for Linux.
    - Numerlor 2y ago
      I've been running zfs on root on my Debian home server, only the install was a tiny bit more involved but it was done in maybe half an hour going off of the guide and trying to understand everything it was doing with 0 experience (... And then did it again after I broke networking after an hour lol)
    - tomxor 2y ago
      No, to be fair I use it for everything except root (which I prefer to backup as IaC, not that I wouldn't use ZFS, it's just not default so requires more effort). I use ZFS datasets to back everything except the OS, including DBs which has been the most satisfying aspect of using ZFS (being able to snapshot live DBs together with all other relevant state rather than a as a separate replication process). While I can't comment on using it for root, I can say for other use, the only annoyance I have is compiling the kernel module on every single update. This is automatically handled by APT, but for very small servers it can be slow... at most ~15 mins. Could be solved with private distribution for a large fleet but I can't be bother with that stuff. Hoping at some point Debian will relax their strict "to the letter of the GPL" attitude at some point like they did with install media drivers. But it's not the worst experience, at least installing is automated.
yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
> My ideal OS would be something like NixOS, but on FreeBSD and with better language than Nix. Something nicer than nix would be nice, but otherwise perhaps keep an eye on https://github.com/nixos-bsd/nixbsd https://github.com/nixos-bsd/nixbsd
- 0x457 2y ago
  Yeah, it's acceptable, I want to try to convert my home server to nixbsd.
xiaoyu2006 2y ago
My ideal OS (for a server) is Guix, NixOS without Nix-the-language. Sadly no one is packaging for it.

mekster 2y ago

Ubuntu can have zfs with an install of a package. BSD’s inability to utilize docker ecosystem had me decided to stick with Ubuntu for a decade, unless things change and BSD gets clear advantages over Linux.

nisa 2y ago
Ubuntu ships an outdated version that misses a lot of bugfixes. They don't seem to be interested in either backporting fixes or shipping the current stable version. Every other day some Ubuntu user hits the ZFS GitHub issues with a problem that was fixed years ago.
- hedora 2y ago
  After hitting this in production, I will never choose Ubuntu again. On top of the things you mentioned, it’s basically impossible to produce a working playbook that switches from Ubuntu’s garbage package to the upstream ones - systemd wedges badly about 25% of the time, and force disables the zfs units. None of the documented systemd overrides worked. I’m enjoying devuan and openbsd at home.
asveikau 2y ago
Here's where I'll show my age. If you got into a unix-like OS in the '90s, the *BSD ergonomics will make more sense. I remember when Ubuntu and docker each entered the scene and my initial impressions of both were pretty negative.
aaronbaugher 2y ago
Ubuntu can have ZFS. FreeBSD just does, as long as you select "ZFS on root" for your disk layout when you install. It just works, and then you automatically get things like snapshots and easy rollback during upgrades.