From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 23 22:05:42 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64BBB106566B; Wed, 23 May 2012 22:05:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ECAF8FC0C; Wed, 23 May 2012 22:05:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id A71305620B; Wed, 23 May 2012 17:05:33 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:05:33 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: Steven Hartland Message-ID: <20120523220533.GA11122@lonesome.com> References: <38A5BC8F-A8FB-4371-AB1D-9548F5957254@lists.zabbadoz.net> <20120523131046.GC2358@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <12410676034.20120524013853@serebryakov.spb.ru> <8D72700F5CA4461BAD1C98908689CB9E@multiplay.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8D72700F5CA4461BAD1C98908689CB9E@multiplay.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: Konstantin Belousov , "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , lev@FreeBSD.org, Kirk McKusick , freebsd-current FreeBSD Subject: Re: UFS+J panics on HEAD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 22:05:42 -0000 On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:58:48PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: > While it might be a shame to see FFS go by the wayside are there any > big reasons why you would rather stick with FFS instead of moving > to ZFS with all the benefits that brings? - ZFS eats bytes for breakfast. It is completely inappropriate for anything with less than 4GB RAM. - ZFS performs poorly under disk-nearly-full conditions. mcl