Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 02:09:57 +1100 From: Darren Reed <darrenr@freebsd.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: When will ZFS become stable? Message-ID: <47960745.3050409@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20080106170452.L105@fledge.watson.org> References: <fll63b$j1c$1@ger.gmane.org> <20080106141157.I105@fledge.watson.org> <flr0np$euj$2@ger.gmane.org> <20080106170452.L105@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: >... One advantage > Solaris has is that it runs primarily on expensive 64-bit servers with > lots of memory. Part of the problem on FreeBSD is that people run ZFS > on sytems with 32-bit CPUs and a lot less memory. It could be that ZFS > should be enforcing higher minimum hardware requirements to mount (i.e., > refusing to run on systems with 32-bit address spaces or <4gb of memory > and inadequate tuning). Before ZFS was released, I was using it internally on a 32bit desktop. It never panic'd although it did get very slow after a while because of the way it managed memory (and probably some bugs :) while in early alpha/beta. At work I run it on my Ultra20 desktop with Solaris 10. It has an AMD64 CPU and I'm pretty only 2GB of RAM, but I'll have to check on the RAM. Darren
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47960745.3050409>