ZFS Port to Linux ( all versions)
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| darshin Aug 20, 2010 7:58 AM EDT |
As we all know, ZFS is by far the best file system. People have workarounds and solutions which are kind of 2nd tone replacements to work on Linux, but either ways, all these solutions are not really good replacements as they either are not stable enough or lack some of the salient features of ZFS. KQ has ported ZFS to Linux and was a much awaited release since January 2010. We are releasing the closed beta in last week of August/first week of september and are looking for closed beta customers who can test it for free on some environments. Mail me at darshin@kqinfotech.com to register. Feel free to put forward any questions as well. Kind Regards, Darshin |
| herzeleid Aug 20, 2010 5:24 PM EDT |
> As we all know, ZFS is by far the best file system. Well, we can't really know that. Sure, zfs is pretty nifty, but it's hard to call any single file system "the best" for all environments and scenarios. I also think btrfs has the potential to make linux users forget about zfs, but I could be wrong. At any rate, if this is a high performance, native linux port of zfs, and not a user-space hack through fuse, I'd really like to check it out. |
| Steven_Rosenber Aug 20, 2010 5:50 PM EDT |
I'm not exactly sure how ZFS is working out in FreeBSD, where it's been in place for a while now. I figured that Linux was looking at btrfs instead of ZFS. I'm still wary of ext4, although I'm using it in Fedora 13. |
| gus3 Aug 20, 2010 6:05 PM EDT |
No choice but to use it in Fedora 13. Grrrr... |
| tuxchick Aug 20, 2010 6:19 PM EDT |
I'm not a high-demand torture-testing user, but I have ext4 on two of my home computers and haven't noticed a thing. Except fast fscks. A filesystem that does not draw attention to itself is good, methinks! |
| tuxchick Aug 20, 2010 6:21 PM EDT |
I do smell a whiff of pink gelatinous meat, perhaps...as I asked in the other thread, is this a native port or another userspace hack? Got a link to more information? |
| tracyanne Aug 20, 2010 6:40 PM EDT |
Quoting:Except fast fscks. A filesystem that does not draw attention to itself is good, methinks! That's what I love about reiserfs. |
| Steven_Rosenber Aug 20, 2010 8:29 PM EDT |
You can't choose ext3 in Fedora 13? That said, I also have had no issues with ext4. |
| gus3 Aug 20, 2010 9:13 PM EDT |
On the live CD, the root image is somehow Ext4, so that's what an installed root must be. That really bites, because I do have issues with Ext4. |
| jdixon Aug 20, 2010 10:47 PM EDT |
> On the live CD, the root image is somehow Ext4, so that's what an installed root must be. You can't install to a preformatted partition? |
| gus3 Aug 21, 2010 12:28 AM EDT |
Just reporting my experience, which (from a Power User perspective) was very less than satisfactory. The problem is, my mother's system is Fedora 12 with root on Ext4. Because of the problems I've encountered with Ext4, I really want to get away from it. |
| tracyanne Aug 21, 2010 2:01 AM EDT |
Quoting:You can't install to a preformatted partition? You certainly can. In fact almost every Ubuntu install I've done has been a manual partition and install to reiserFS for the root filesystem. |
| bigg Aug 21, 2010 9:24 AM EDT |
> You can't install to a preformatted partition? At least in an earlier release, you had three choices when installing from the live CD: ext4, ext4, and ext4. If you wanted something else, you had to use the DVD. That may well have changed. |
| herzeleid Aug 22, 2010 4:45 PM EDT |
Quoting:The problem is, my mother's system is Fedora 12 with root on Ext4. Because of the problems I've encountered with Ext4, I really want to get away from it.Perhaps the problems lie with fedora, and not with ext4 per se. I've had nothing but good performance and reliability from ubuntu on ext4. |
| gus3 Aug 22, 2010 5:49 PM EDT |
No, because I've seen the same mis-behavior on Slackware 13.1 (-current, actually), and that's about as stock-code as you can get. A reboot with a forced fsck can go into an infinite reboot loop, when e2fsck keeps reporting the same errors and fixes, without really fixing them. Things like incorrect reference counts, allocated inodes with no referring directory entries, stuff like that. |
| jdixon Aug 22, 2010 8:22 PM EDT |
> ...and that's about as stock-code as you can get. True. That makes me glad I selected ext3 as my filesystem when I installed 13.1 last weekend (it's a newer machine, and I'm still setting it up. My primary machine is still running 12.2). |
| jacog Aug 23, 2010 5:44 AM EDT |
Quoting:That's what I love about reiserfs. I think that whole spouse murder thing drew enough attention to it already. ;) |
| hkwint Aug 23, 2010 7:55 AM EDT |
gus3: Did you notice the warnings VirtualBox throws when using ext4? Says it can lead to possible data corruption and I should take another FS. Probably it was a stupid decision to 'update' my partitions to ext4, but hey, at least this guinea pig tries to help the community, ahem. |
| gus3 Aug 23, 2010 9:50 AM EDT |
I've never used VirtualBox. |
| caitlyn Aug 23, 2010 8:29 PM EDT |
I still have yet to see a benchmark where zfs outperforms xfs, particularly in dealing with very large files. I don't think there is a "best" filesystem. They all have different characteristics and which is best depends on your usage model. FWIW, ext4 has been flawless for me in SalixOS these last 10 months. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [Editors, MEMBERS, SITEADMINS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!