From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 2 07:39:58 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E001065670 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 07:39:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nslay@comcast.net) Received: from QMTA03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.32]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D648FC0C for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 07:39:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nslay@comcast.net) Received: from OMTA13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.52]) by QMTA03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id m7DC1a00917UAYkA37PyNF; Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:23:58 +0000 Received: from LIGHTBULB.LOCAL ([68.35.224.189]) by OMTA13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id m7Pw1a00145o48c8Z7PxtA; Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:23:57 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=YOglmoOUv8IA:10 a=hmvqgfPCrs8A:10 a=XptsId3dtelf0zPST2oA:9 a=3byKtiITsdt_okUqd-3lqL_ZOZIA:4 a=csDljm-qqwUA:10 Message-ID: <4934E276.3050308@comcast.net> Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:23:34 -0500 From: Nathan Lay User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081110) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivan Voras References: <200812010959.15647.kirk@strauser.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disenchanted with ZFS; alternatives? 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: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:39:58 -0000 Ivan Voras wrote: > Kirk Strauser wrote: > > >> At this point, I'm almost ready to go back to good ol' UFS2, but I'd hate to >> give up that easy addition of new filesystems. I *could* have a single 700GB >> root FS but that just doesn't seem right. Are there any good, tested GEOM- >> based ways of getting that functionality, perhaps along the lines of using >> something like gvirstor and growfs as needed? >> > > There's nothing as convenient as ZFS (really... anywhere) :( . > > I'm still hoping someone will sponsor development or porting of a widely > used journalling file system like XFS, JFS, even ext3/4 to FreeBSD, but > in the meantime UFS2+SU isn't that bad. Practically the only way to > break it is if you have hardware errors that end up corrupting file > system data. The need to run full fsck occasionally (as opposed to the > softupdates-assisted one) is annoying but 700 GB should be manageable > with 3-4 GB of memory. The softupdates-assisted fsck actually works very > well in all but the heaviest loads (i.e. when the server is swamped by > requests immediately after booting). > > You could also try gjournal but benchmark and test it first for your > workload. > > gvirstor is a theoretically good option if you need its specific > functionality, only be doubly sure to benchmark it for your specific > workload as it has some /unusual/ performance characteristics. > > What about DragonFlyBSD's new HAMMER FS? I hear it has similar capabilities as ZFS without the overhead. Though, strangely, I haven't really heard anyone discuss it even though it was released some months ago. Best Regards, Nathan Lay