Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 01:02:49 +0200 From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> To: Jeremy Chadwick <jdc@koitsu.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: ZFS "stalls" -- and maybe we should be talking about defaults? Message-ID: <FE28C814-2031-49D7-AB57-4C05874C1700@digsys.bg> In-Reply-To: <20130305220936.GA54718@icarus.home.lan> References: <513524B2.6020600@denninger.net> <89680320E0FA4C0A99D522EA2037CE6E@multiplay.co.uk> <20130305050539.GA52821@anubis.morrow.me.uk> <20130305053249.GA38107@icarus.home.lan> <5135D275.3050500@FreeBSD.org> <20130305220936.GA54718@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 6, 2013, at 12:09 AM, Jeremy Chadwick <jdc@koitsu.org> wrote: > I say that knowing lots of people use ZFS-on-root, which is great -- I > just wonder how many of them have tested all the crazy scenarios and > then tried to boot from things. I have verified that ZFS-on-root works reliably in all of the following = scenarios: single disk, one mirror vdev, many mirror vdevs, raidz. = Haven't found the time to test many raidz vdevs, I admit. :) Combined with "boot environments" (that can be served many different = ways), ZFS on root is short of a miracle. ZFS on FreeBSD has some issues, mostly with huge installations and = defaults/tuning, but not really with ZFS-on-root. Of course, if for example, you follow stable, you should be prepared = with alternative boot media that supports the current zpool/zfs = versions. But this is small cost to pay. Daniel=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FE28C814-2031-49D7-AB57-4C05874C1700>