Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 14:16:28 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Jonathan Hogg <jonathan@onegoodidea.com> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS for a desktop computer Message-ID: <49160FBC.2070401@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3BB3B5B4-D3A7-4A1E-A5F5-3B33B6479154@onegoodidea.com> References: <20081101114717.0ffc2ec8@valhala> <200811011517.37640.lists@jnielsen.net> <1225667670.12521.7.camel@RabbitsDen> <3BB3B5B4-D3A7-4A1E-A5F5-3B33B6479154@onegoodidea.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jonathan Hogg wrote: > On 2 Nov 2008, at 23:14, Alexandre Sunny Kovalenko wrote: > >> Just a "me too". I am using ZFS on my i386 (Core Duo) laptop: / >> and /boot are UFS2, /usr and /home are ZFS. Main appeal in my case was >> the startup time after the panic -- doing fsck on 120GB /home was not >> fun. I have to admit that machine has 3GB of real memory in it, though. > > I have everything except /boot on ZFS on an i386 machine with 2GB of > RAM. I've not had any problems. Being able to snapshot the whole system > before doing an installworld is a major plus in my view. Not to mention > the warm fuzzy feeling one gets from doing a full scrub of 1.5TB of > RAIDZ data and knowing it's all clean on disk. > > I'd be happier still if the more recent ZFS patch had made it into 7.1. > It'd be nice for it to make it into CURRENT at least. Is there any news > on that? If you are referring to the new ZFS version, then the answer is that pjd has been busy, but the last I heard Sun still needed to fix some bugs we discovered in testing. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49160FBC.2070401>