From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 24 19:13:25 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3118216A41F for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:13:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (chylonia.3miasto.net [83.12.228.78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4DD013C44B for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:13:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5OJDJdn002732; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:13:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id l5OJDINA002729; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:13:18 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:13:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Jim Capozzoli In-Reply-To: <37f72b1f0706231127s2e0f0316k91238543b925c757@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070624211222.I2720@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <20070615165131.GC51206@pcjas.obspm.fr> <20070615183413.GA9693@rot13.obsecurity.org> <37f72b1f0706151225s53c8c2f1k17d00c9c6f96004d@mail.gmail.com> <20070615214255.GA12923@rot13.obsecurity.org> <37f72b1f0706231127s2e0f0316k91238543b925c757@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS(2, 3 ?) vs ZFS. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:13:25 -0000 >> >> It could be done. At the present time ZFS is not really suitable on >> systems without a lot of memory (I'd recommend at least 1GB). It is >> also very hard to tune it to perform well on i386 because of VM and >> address space issues. It might be possible to address these over >> time. 1GB for disk and filesystem? nice joke :) even worse than windows.