4 ms·
My experiences with btrfs over the past many years on my laptop and my desktop have been quite good. I, for one, do want my FS to run on 32-bit systems and, do
by simoncion 12y ago
My experiences with btrfs over the past many years on my laptop and my desktop have been quite good.
I, for one, do want my FS to run on 32-bit systems and, don't want it to require gigs of RAM to get its work done. (My information may be out of date, as I stopped looking at ZFS once it became clear that btrfs was stable enough for the tasks that I was putting it to.)
- takeda 12y agoZFS does not require gigs of RAM to work, it's ARC that does. You can have ARC disabled, but then ZFS performance isn't that good.
- ryao 12y agoARC would be perfectly happy with small amounts of memory. ZFS ' ARC implementation will free memory as required by the system (provided that the Linux kernel asks) and grow when memory is not in use up to zfs_arc_max. The limit is completely configurable and can be set to something small like 64MB.
- ryao 12y ago32-bit support is a sore spot caused by differences in how Solaris and Linux do memory allocations. Expect to see it fixed in the next 6 months. That aside, >99% of memory used by ZFS on many systems is used for cache. It does not need that to operate, but like all filesystems, it performs better with more cache.