From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb 25 14:57:12 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 151BF832
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:57:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9918213
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:57:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C0B120DCD
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:57:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from web3 ([10.202.2.213])
 by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:57:03 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=message-id:x-sasl-enc:from:to
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to
 :references:subject:date; s=smtpout; bh=zMD9SqVGanasr837ZDraY2z6
 Dq0=; b=plgQ+YIixGUyADvFj0BquuPglAC1TFX2i2eiVCcNarpLQ/N6/Nv6a4qm
 MWr/7Lc5wOOxwSAbpjzBGykgI+UVe9GXZX29BsZmkpXGozqmRBTguwzoRYj1Du6r
 P9h5I80tvaW3gXCvwzrZTFFth4tEJfqKBUObKepVNinMDB/cFJE=
Received: by web3.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99)
 id D2EAE11B4A1; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:57:03 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <1424876223.3248960.232271733.32363554@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: hxf33gbwIe2pdLN54KpRdXIuow96vmxvc/JmEasIimQR 1424876223
From: Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org>
To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-4ba7306c
In-Reply-To: <CAD2Ti2-ZWG2paJojWGnj-aNOf68aocmKRn6gpsS+DPD+FHwr_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD2Ti2-ZWG2paJojWGnj-aNOf68aocmKRn6gpsS+DPD+FHwr_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Zoned Commands ZBS/ZAC, Shingled SMR/SFS, ZFS
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 08:57:03 -0600
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:57:12 -0000



On Fri, Feb 20, 2015, at 14:15, grarpamp wrote:
> These may be of interest for possible integration...
> 

Do I understand the scope of this correctly:

- SMR drives are the future for increasing drive capacity
- SMR drives are terrible at random IO
- There is work in Linux to detect these SMR drives and alter ZFS'
behavior


Is that correct? If so, it's interesting... but sort of annoying that we
are basically creating quirks and a wildly different codepath because
the drive manufacturers haven't figured out another way to increase
density and keep expected behavior.