From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 14 01:34:21 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20601EA for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 01:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFC482C23 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 01:34:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1X6V9a-00063D-Fb for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 03:34:06 +0200 Received: from dynamic34-29.dynamic.dal.ca ([129.173.34.203]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 03:34:06 +0200 Received: from jrm by dynamic34-29.dynamic.dal.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 03:34:06 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: Joseph Mingrone Subject: Re: deciding UFS vs ZFS Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:33:52 -0300 Lines: 20 Message-ID: <86sim4yb9b.fsf@gly.ftfl.ca> References: <20140713190308.GA9678@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <20140714071443.42f615c5@X220.alogt.com> <53C326EE.1030405@my.hennepintech.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamic34-29.dynamic.dal.ca User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (berkeley-unix) Cancel-Lock: sha1:J6QWkLBd5uSTxwsRbvdfn8WLylk= X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 01:34:21 -0000 Andrew Berg writes: > On 2014.07.13 18:14, Erich Dollansky wrote: >> use UFS as long as you are working with a single disk and ZFS the >> moment you have more than one disk. > Checksumming and the COW features make ZFS quite attractive for single-device > pools as well. Off the top of my head, there is also on-the-fly compression, snapshots and boot environments. The way pools/datasets don't require you to decide how much space is allocated for a dataset at creation time is nice. I am happy I chose ZFS for my laptop with 8 GiB of ram and a single SSD. It works very well, just like our compute node with 256 GiB of ram, 48 cores connected to a 40-disk chassis. The way I think about it is more this way: "When can't I run ZFS?". The answer is when system resources simply don't allow it. Joseph