From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 16 14:32:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041DC16A4CE for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 14:32:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from athena.softcardsystems.com (mail.softcardsystems.com [12.34.136.114]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04C143D2F for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 14:32:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sah@softcardsystems.com) Received: from athena (athena [12.34.136.114])i8GFVv3J028732 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:31:57 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:31:57 -0500 (EST) From: Sam X-X-Sender: sah@athena To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: ZFS X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 14:32:19 -0000 On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Jan Grant wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Sam wrote: > >> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Ivan Voras wrote: >> >>> It looks like Sun is going to obsolete their UFS: >>> http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/?biga=15 >>> >>> Any comments? Anybody tried it yet? >>> It seems like they have built on and extented concepts presented by geom >>> and >>> softupdates. >>> >>> Sun's been using a lot of ideas present in FreeBSD: jails, linux >>> "emulation", and now this, and extended them nicely into their >>> "enterprise-grade" idea. It would be interesting to try it in action :) >>> >> >> "Sun engineers wondered if the 64-bit capabilities of current file systems >> will continue to suffice over the next 10 to 20 years. Their answer was no. >> If >> Moore's Law holds, in 10 to 15 years people will need a 65th bit. As a >> 128-bit >> system, ZFS is designed to support more storage, more file systems, more >> snapshots, more directory entries, and more files than can possibly be >> created >> in the foreseeable future." >> >> Call me crazy, but does anyone else see this as hooey? 2^64 512B >> sectors is 8192 zettabytes (zetta, exa, peta, tera, ...). >> >> I'm also wondering what perversion of moore's law is applicable to >> storage consumption. >> >> Crappy marketing articles. > > CERN's LHC is expected to produce 10-15 PB/year. e-science ("the grid") > is capable of producing whopping huge data sets, and people already are. > Many aspects of data custodianship are still open questions, but there's > little doubt that what's cutting-edge storage today will be in > filesystems between now and 10 years' time. Filesystem views on data > sets that are physically stored and replicated at disparate locations > around the planet are the kind of things that potentially need larger > than 64-bit quantities. > Let's suppose you generate an exabyte of storage per year. Filling a 64-bit filesystem would take you approximately 8 million years. I'm not saying we'll never get there, just that doing it now is nothing more than a "look at us, ain't we forward thinking" ploy. It's a _single filesystem_. If you want another 8192 ZB, just make another. Sam