From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Tue Apr 30 07:10:51 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F06601585A38 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 07:10:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from soth.netfence.it (net-2-44-121-52.cust.vodafonedsl.it [2.44.121.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEA6A8FCFA for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 07:10:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Received: from alamar.ventu (alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by soth.netfence.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x3U7AZDP003298 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 30 Apr 2019 09:10:44 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18] claimed to be alamar.ventu Subject: Re: ZFS... To: Michelle Sullivan Cc: freebsd-stable References: <30506b3d-64fb-b327-94ae-d9da522f3a48@sorbs.net> <56833732-2945-4BD3-95A6-7AF55AB87674@sorbs.net> From: Andrea Venturoli Message-ID: <3d0f6436-f3d7-6fee-ed81-a24d44223f2f@netfence.it> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 09:10:35 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56833732-2945-4BD3-95A6-7AF55AB87674@sorbs.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BEA6A8FCFA X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ml@netfence.it designates 2.44.121.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ml@netfence.it X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.92 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.989,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:2.44.121.52]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[netfence.it]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mailserver.netfence.it]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; SUBJ_ALL_CAPS(0.45)[6]; IP_SCORE(-0.42)[ip: (-1.21), ipnet: 2.44.0.0/16(-0.61), asn: 30722(-0.31), country: IT(0.05)]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.65)[-0.653,0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:30722, ipnet:2.44.0.0/16, country:IT]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 07:10:51 -0000 On 4/30/19 2:41 AM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > The system was originally built on 9.0, and got upgraded through out the years... zfsd was not available back then. So get your point, but maybe you didn’t realize this blog was a history of 8+ years? That's one of the first things I thought about while reading the original post: what can be inferred from it is that ZFS might not have been that good in the past. It *could* still suffer from the same problems or it *could* have improved and be more resilient. Answering that would be interesting... bye av.