From nobody Thu Sep 23 21:00:52 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-cloud@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51D917D8ED8 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 21:01:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pat@patmaddox.com) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4HFndB3XLqz4dR2; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 21:01:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pat@patmaddox.com) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6221732007E8; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:00:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:00:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=patmaddox.com; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh= J/BS2F3zE2251hGoIBwExqW1W4OIcmnaTkNb7Yf5GSM=; b=Fkz8Ncbv2asF/TnD foBQNJxOwMlax9gfDkzusqBE70oLGS0yAK5t/jyI/Xe5kDPu6Zcs1sL4YLdl04uB WW8HXCXYgBuQTv2K+4IY93DJCVXcwLRH8HJQRuPLLYViiDAwCZS7qsoHoyapOTYJ aM6yQGSzCpMVU79/r20DbLPLG23djlbXIXAHLpaXC/ZhDzKDykm9mBI2JWeSDWTy uYQeW9bK2YWU1KHhL94hht7jD5IP7qB3Z9AUv/jsDUVv57RSQjMChTYg269jFJ9o I6yKDmflJVravaGTuso4jUjoxiN0zGsk+BqKShNBarFi269nfFUJC4Wp1MRtj4vi fOyJaA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=J/BS2F3zE2251hGoIBwExqW1W4OIcmnaTkNb7Yf5G SM=; b=PFG0D+rTIq9euE/Szupbh0XjhkHYse3msr0JTILpG7mtfyVxY6a3aVYeU VIDTyKUg1JucVKDU5RhtzkVs0l5LxO2oaYZFjHTyPqvxfP/C+FH2ynODXeljpDeN Mv8U16420HGnSeb1oWOmypWQnn/IgoJZuoEXWsizFZHO2OzlsNRVfr9wxctHO8/L ibGilqWYkyLWbjhbG1eogoIY+U/k2SgEdNQrx4FrOwIcJz6TjC4fp/Z+ok5aYJoH 1ylE5/1wHUJ7uu4fcRWeTVIF630OHSpt2WqQh2dkg5UnJDzwN+vBadxktim0TJc2 J4TmvndAC1vFJT16vk6G66bncmWvg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrudeiledgudehhecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffokfgjfhggtgfgsehtqhhmtdertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfrfgr thcuofgrugguohigfdcuoehprghtsehprghtmhgrugguohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeegveejjeevleetfedvleegvefftdelhfefudfhgfeiheektdelueelveeh ffehteenucffohhmrghinhepuggrvghmohhnohhlohhghidrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvg hrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehprghtsehprghtmhgruggu ohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:00:54 -0400 (EDT) From: "Pat Maddox" To: "Colin Percival" Cc: freebsd-cloud@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Current status of ZFS AMIs on EC2? Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 14:00:52 -0700 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <12428f52-ea5a-a2e5-7eb6-e170c97f0e17@freebsd.org> References: <65D39FF2-C14D-430E-A83B-0C3606E0D7AF@patmaddox.com> <12428f52-ea5a-a2e5-7eb6-e170c97f0e17@freebsd.org> List-Id: FreeBSD on cloud platforms (EC2, GCE, Azure, etc.) List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-cloud List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-cloud@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4HFndB3XLqz4dR2 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On 23 Sep 2021, at 13:22, Colin Percival wrote: > On 9/23/21 1:49 AM, Pat Maddox wrote: >> Hi there, I came across Colin=E2=80=99s 2019 post announcing ZFS AMIs = for = >> EC2 [1]. I >> haven=E2=80=99t seen any more recent information regarding ZFS on EC2.= = >> I=E2=80=99ve launched >> one instance, and it appears to work fine from initial tests = >> (including >> recovering a known working boot env using beadm). >> >> I have also installed the official 12 and 13 releases, and see that = >> they are UFS. >> >> I have two questions: >> >> 1. Is anyone using the ZFS AMIs for production? > > Yes. (Not me, but I've heard from several people who are. I'll let = > them > identify themselves if they choose to do so.) > >> 2. Why has ZFS not been incorporated into the official releases? > > ZFS, and other "flavoured" AMIs, were blocked waiting for this: > > https://www.daemonology.net/blog/2021-08-31-FreeBSD-AMI-SSM-Public-Para= meters.html > > Now it's just a matter of finding time; my current top priority for = > EC2 > is speeding up the FreeBSD boot process. Great, thanks for the info. I=E2=80=99ve done a 12.0 -> 12.2 -> 13.0 upgr= ade, = all seems to be good. Pat