Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:37:26 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: "=?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?=" <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: When will ZFS become stable? Message-ID: <9bbcef730801070637v6db39e97o34b89b10dad75617@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86y7b168ay.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <fll63b$j1c$1@ger.gmane.org> <86y7b168ay.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/01/2008, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote: > Your question is based on the premise that ZFS in FreeBSD 7 is unstable. > That premise is false. At most, we'll have to agree to disagree. A "tuning" of the system (at least from my experience) is about system performance, not whether the system will crash or not. You may define the word to mean something else but that's your thing. The reason I'm aggressively discussing this is that labeling the problem as "tuning" will, for any non-trivial task which has some growth in system load, result in a server that needs constant tuning just to survive another day. What is tuned today may as well result in a crash tomorrow if the load rises. Web servers are notorious for this (though other types have of course similar behaviour) - a "slashdotting" of a "properly tuned" FreeBSD system with ZFS will not result in a slowdown - it will result in the system crashing. This is not acceptable, and therefore dismissing it as "just tuning" is counterproductive and bad engineering.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef730801070637v6db39e97o34b89b10dad75617>