Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:58:23 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: "Peter Schuller" <peter.schuller@infidyne.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: When will ZFS become stable? Message-ID: <9bbcef730801060458k4bc9f2d6uc3f097d70e087b68@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200801061051.26817.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> References: <fll63b$j1c$1@ger.gmane.org> <20080104163352.GA42835@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <9bbcef730801040958t36e48c9fjd0fbfabd49b08b97@mail.gmail.com> <200801061051.26817.peter.schuller@infidyne.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06/01/2008, Peter Schuller <peter.schuller@infidyne.com> wrote: > > This number is not so large. It seems to be easily crashed by rsync, > > for example (speaking from my own experience, and also some of my > > colleagues). > > I can definitely say this is not *generally* true, as I do a lot of > rsyncing/rdiff-backup:ing and similar stuff (with many files / large files) > on ZFS without any stability issues. Problems for me have been limited to > 32bit and the memory exhaustion issue rather than "hard" issues. It's not generally true since kmem problems with rsync are often hard to repeat - I have them on one machine, but not on another, similar machine. This nonrepeatability is also a part of the problem. > But perhaps that's all you are referring to. Mostly. I did have a ZFS crash with rsync that wasn't kmem related, but only once.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef730801060458k4bc9f2d6uc3f097d70e087b68>