Re: UFS+J panics on HEAD
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig4B1B4E8EC067CFA6D2763DAB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 24/05/2012 00:05, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:58:48PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
>> > While it might be a shame to see FFS go by the wayside are there any=
>> > big reasons why you would rather stick with FFS instead of moving
>> > to ZFS with all the benefits that brings?
> - ZFS eats bytes for breakfast. It is completely inappropriate
> for anything with less than 4GB RAM.
>=20
> - ZFS performs poorly under disk-nearly-full conditions.
- ZFS is not optimal for situations where there are a lot of small,
randomly dispersed IOs around the disk space. Like in any sort of
RDBMS.
Even so, ZFS is certainly my personal default nowadays. On a machine of
any size, the question is not "should I use ZFS?" but "are there any
good reasons why I shouldn't use ZFS? (And if so, what could I do to
make it possible to use ZFS anyhow...)"
With Andriy's recent patches to zfboot to extend support for Boot
Environments, it's all starting to look particularly sexy.
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
--------------enig4B1B4E8EC067CFA6D2763DAB
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk++ku4ACgkQ8Mjk52CukIypiQCfcvWklgqHgINkuRUeHR74txWw
cBMAn0LBfh8Ql5ynvMjPUMkNx3QXtSEJ
=ISa3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enig4B1B4E8EC067CFA6D2763DAB--
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 14 之 14 篇)：