Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 13:04:45 +0000 From: rb@gid.co.uk To: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> Cc: Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: The future of ZFS in FreeBSD Message-ID: <2A394CBF-7739-4F64-B559-BBF513EC141B@gid.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <e74fdc25-a120-786e-030a-bcb8a5ef53c5@multiplay.co.uk> References: <CAPrugNriggEMMnLTZtf6xNQNYajBYNMnGdN96-ejDYQonoOhgw@mail.gmail.com> <CAHEMsqbhdcy1GKznVhxKAqCabYHvm_G9oxQR6eQrJ372215E0w@mail.gmail.com> <CAPrugNpr1YCo%2Br%2BCCts-uEfdU-nOF6-g15eqODJa_nKia_PwWw@mail.gmail.com> <CAHEMsqaJERWM_HpD4ru8Jj6QhVEb_CoOotzH1oPuYa95AoqWeA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPrugNpU2nnyuxetwvgeHXVNKRiDMk3uO-0OSBZ5nK55PKpY8A@mail.gmail.com> <B527B90E-9C5E-4DC5-8DE5-35A85221BA64@gid.co.uk> <e74fdc25-a120-786e-030a-bcb8a5ef53c5@multiplay.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 20 Dec 2018, at 11:58, Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> wrote: > > > > On 20/12/2018 11:03, Bob Bishop wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> On 19 Dec 2018, at 23:16, Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 15:11 Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry been off for a few weeks so must have missed that, please do prod me >>>> on again if you don’t see any response to anything not just this. Like many >>>> others I get so may emails across so many lists it’s more than likely I >>>> just missed it. >>>> >>>> That said would you say that with the right support we can make progress >>>> on the this prior to the port? I have to ask as the alternative version has >>>> been on the cusp for many years now so it’s feels more like a distant >>>> memory than something that may happen, no disrespect to anyone involved, as >>>> I know all too well how hard it can be to get something like this over the >>>> line, especially when people have competing priorities. >>>> >>> I am hoping that it's sufficiently important to FreeBSD ZFS developers that >>> they'll give the PR the attention it needs so that it can be merged before >>> summer. My understanding is that it's mostly suffered from neglect. TRIM is >>> most important to FreeBSD and it already had its own implementation. >>> >>> https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/pull/5925 >> Please correct me if I’m wrong but this looks a lot less mature than FreeBSD’s existing TRIM support for ZFS which we’ve had in production for six years. >> >> What is the rationale here? I’m concerned that it looks like an opportunity for mighty regressions. >> > This is the case, but overall this solution is thought to be a better approach. > > With anything like this there is always a risk, so we all need a concerted effort to get to one solution. Not sure what I can contribute, but I can certainly put a box up for testing when there’s something to test. > Regards > Steve > -- Bob Bishop rb@gid.co.uk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2A394CBF-7739-4F64-B559-BBF513EC141B>