Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:47:46 -0600
From:      "Jason J. W. Williams" <jasonjwwilliams@gmail.com>
To:        Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com>, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [CFT] ZFS v15 patch (version 3)
Message-ID:  <AF7CFEEA-75A6-4AD5-BD5E-CCD33CEAC14E@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C357F0A.70009@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4C31C71C.2010606@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTilPv4ujPjfexMQpEYZ7buk7oWwSS5B1l14Wjl0K@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinYeQtiCRSrLt6GAcrOcumugvPREizRrugXY5-0@mail.gmail.com> <4C357F0A.70009@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Martin,

If you're using it for NFS then that can be a good feature, but I see a lot m=
ore folks complaining about lack of removal for log devices.=20

We've been using ZFS on OpenSolaris for DB servers since 2006 and OpenSolari=
s bits are very stable. In most cases we've found ZFS under OSol to be more s=
table than Solaris. Normally this is due to the youth of ZFS and the speed w=
ith which bugs are being corrected...which end up in OSol while Solaris lang=
uishes under it's long release cycle.  I'll posit Joyent as an example here o=
f the stability of OSol bits...they use the SXCE distro recently discontinue=
d.=20

v19 also includes a number of performance fixes for DB workloads.=20

-J

Sent via iPhone

Is your e-mail Premiere?

On Jul 8, 2010, at 1:32, Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> User and group quotas is no important enhancement?
>=20
> We have to see the whole thing from a stability perspective as well -
> OpenSolaris has by far less testing than Solaris 10.
> Oracle cannot afford to feed his enterprise customers (and these are not
> few) with untested code.
>=20
> D=C5=88a 7. 7. 2010 20:30, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote / nap=C3=ADsal(a):
>> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Jason J. W. Williams
>> <jasonjwwilliams@gmail.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> If the target is FreeBSD 9 instead of 8.1, why not merge ZFS v19? 15
>>> really doesn't give any major enhancements over 14 and FreeBSD 9 isn't
>>> coming out any time.
>>>=20
>>> 19 would give much need log device removal and triple parity RAID-Z.
>>> Both of which are well tested at this point via OpenSolaris.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>> these are very valid points, but I am not sure that anyone has zfs v19 pa=
tches
>>=20
>>=20



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AF7CFEEA-75A6-4AD5-BD5E-CCD33CEAC14E>