From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 18 17:52:12 2008 Return-Path: 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 C3F881065670 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:52:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scode@hyperion.scode.org) Received: from hyperion.scode.org (cl-1361.ams-04.nl.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:960:2:550::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A21B8FC16 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:52:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scode@hyperion.scode.org) Received: by hyperion.scode.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id CA7B123C44D; Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:52:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:52:10 +0100 From: Peter Schuller To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20081118175210.GA3753@hyperion.scode.org> References: <20081109174303.GA5146@ourbrains.org> <20081109184349.GG51239@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <4920D879.3070806@jrv.org> <20081117050441.GA16855@ourbrains.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081117050441.GA16855@ourbrains.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Subject: Re: Will XFS be adopted X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:52:12 -0000 --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > YES! In my opinion it's not even appropriate for a machine with 2GB of > RAM. Why waste so much RAM on an FS? Does anyone know? Or is this some > sort of conspiracy to sell more bgger boxes. It's Sun, afterall.... I don't know whether, when people say this, they are just trying to spew FUD or they really don't realize the distinction. But regardless, please note that ZFS does not "waste" 2 GBs of memory. The memory it "uses" has to do with the fact that it has a dedicated cache - the ARC - that is distinct from the otherwise operating system integrated buffer cache. Now I *fully* realize that this sucks for some use cases (I have such use cases myself) where you simply do not want to reserve a portion of memory to file system caching. I also realize that the issues people have in terms of forcing the ARC to be really small can be a problem. However, the implication when people say that ZFS "wastes" a bunch of memory, seems to be that it somehow just uses up a bunch of memory for no good reason other than some kind of bloat. This is not the case. --=20 / Peter Schuller PGP userID: 0xE9758B7D or 'Peter Schuller ' Key retrieval: Send an E-Mail to getpgpkey@scode.org E-Mail: peter.schuller@infidyne.com Web: http://www.scode.org --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkkjAMoACgkQDNor2+l1i32YxQCgj1i2zdgOaUecXjoLqeYXGEXo Da8AnRllaDWtO0DXL1FuLr6GVU8HBXIT =lV54 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH--