From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Dec 20 21:22:59 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9461065670;
	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:22:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu)
Received: from people.fsn.hu (people.fsn.hu [195.228.252.137])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E9ED8FC12;
	Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:22:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by people.fsn.hu (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 7A99D1CC85F; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:22:56 +0100 (CET)
X-CRM114-Version: 20090423-BlameSteveJobs ( TRE 0.7.6 (BSD) ) MF-ACE0E1EA [pR:
	13.6776]
X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20091220_22225_C7AABC08 
X-CRM114-Status: Good  ( pR: 13.6776 )
Message-ID: <4B2E95AE.9040402@fsn.hu>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:22:54 +0100
From: Attila Nagy <bra@fsn.hu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090817 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com>
References: <20091030223225.GI5120@datapipe.com> <4AEB6D79.5070703@feral.com>
	<4B2E0FA9.1050003@fsn.hu> <4B2E65FC.9070609@feral.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B2E65FC.9070609@feral.com>
X-Stationery: 0.4.10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3
	(people.fsn.hu); Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:22:55 +0100 (CET)
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Plans for Logged/Journaled UFS
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:22:59 -0000

Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
>>>>  
>>> Which use cases can you name?
>> Reliable data storage. :(
> Jeez, I wrote this months ago.
>
> Do you feel that improving UFS is a better way to go?
No, I think ZFS is the good way (although it has its problems as well). 
And I'm very grateful to the guys who worked on this.
I've just summed my experiences, which tells me ZFS is still not ready 
for prime time. Where UFS keeps running for years, ZFS suddenly crashes, 
or worse, just freezes, in a way, which is hard to debug for the average 
user (a crashdump is easy, but when I can't even go to the debugger, 
that's hard).
I hope that things will settle down and ZFS will be as much reliable in 
FreeBSD as UFS is now (or even better, I've had some bad crashes with 
UFS thanks to on-disk data corruption).