Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:31:57 -0500 (EST)
From:      Sam <sah@softcardsystems.com>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ZFS
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.60.0409161031280.28550@athena>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Jan Grant wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Sam wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> 
>>> It looks like Sun is going to obsolete their UFS:
>>> http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/?biga=15
>>> 
>>> Any comments? Anybody tried it yet?
>>> It seems like they have built on and extented concepts presented by geom 
>>> and
>>> softupdates.
>>> 
>>> Sun's been using a lot of ideas present in FreeBSD: jails, linux
>>> "emulation", and now this, and extended them nicely into their
>>> "enterprise-grade" idea. It would be interesting to try it in action :)
>>> 
>> 
>> "Sun engineers wondered if the 64-bit capabilities of current file systems
>> will continue to suffice over the next 10 to 20 years. Their answer was no. 
>> If
>> Moore's Law holds, in 10 to 15 years people will need a 65th bit. As a 
>> 128-bit
>> system, ZFS is designed to support more storage, more file systems, more
>> snapshots, more directory entries, and more files than can possibly be 
>> created
>> in the foreseeable future."
>> 
>> Call me crazy, but does anyone else see this as hooey?  2^64 512B
>> sectors is 8192 zettabytes (zetta, exa, peta, tera, ...).
>> 
>> I'm also wondering what perversion of moore's law is applicable to
>> storage consumption.
>> 
>> Crappy marketing articles.
> 
> CERN's LHC is expected to produce 10-15 PB/year. e-science ("the grid")
> is capable of producing whopping huge data sets, and people already are.
> Many aspects of data custodianship are still open questions, but there's
> little doubt that what's cutting-edge storage today will be in
> filesystems between now and 10 years' time. Filesystem views on data
> sets that are physically stored and replicated at disparate locations
> around the planet are the kind of things that potentially need larger
> than 64-bit quantities.
>

Let's suppose you generate an exabyte of storage per year.  Filling a 64-bit 
filesystem would take you approximately 8 million years.

I'm not saying we'll never get there, just that doing it now is nothing
more than a "look at us, ain't we forward thinking" ploy.  It's a
_single filesystem_.  If you want another 8192 ZB, just make another.

Sam




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.60.0409161031280.28550>