Quicksearch
Disclaimer
The individual owning this blog works for Oracle in Germany. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.
ZFS at home?
Wednesday, May 3. 2006
James Dickens wrote a good article about ZFS in his weblog. Really worth a read and the article explains, why ZFS is even a good choice at home.
By the way: Asked by a die-hard-mac user, why ZFS is a good idea for MacOS, i answered two days ago: Imagine the capabilities of a big NetAPP Filer, the ease of use of FAT but with enterprise-class capabilities like mirroring and snapshots and much more of Sun´s secret sauce and you get ZFS. When you see autorepair of a mirror, because an consumer-SATA-drive failed, you want ZFS at home. When you see, that you don´t need filesystem checks, journals or logs any longer, you want ZFS at home. When you´ve done your first incremental replication backup of your photolibrary to an remote sever over WAN with 2 commands (zfs backup -i pool/fs@a pool/fs@b | ssh host zfs restore -d poolB/restored/fs) you want ZFS.
By the way: Asked by a die-hard-mac user, why ZFS is a good idea for MacOS, i answered two days ago: Imagine the capabilities of a big NetAPP Filer, the ease of use of FAT but with enterprise-class capabilities like mirroring and snapshots and much more of Sun´s secret sauce and you get ZFS. When you see autorepair of a mirror, because an consumer-SATA-drive failed, you want ZFS at home. When you see, that you don´t need filesystem checks, journals or logs any longer, you want ZFS at home. When you´ve done your first incremental replication backup of your photolibrary to an remote sever over WAN with 2 commands (zfs backup -i pool/fs@a pool/fs@b | ssh host zfs restore -d poolB/restored/fs) you want ZFS.
Posted by Joerg Moellenkamp
in English, Sun/Oracle
at
09:37
| Comment (1)
| Trackback (1)
View as PDF: This entry | This month | Full blog
Defined tags for this entry: Sun
View as PDF: This entry | This month | Full blog
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Warum ZFS (oder im Grunde jedes andere Dateisystem) eine gute Idee für den Mac ist? Weil HFS+ stinkt und tote Hamster durch Strohhalme saugt. HFS+ speichert Daten in einer Baumstruktur, und hat für diese Baumstruktur am Ende nur ein einziges, globales Lock. Dadurch werden effektiv alle Schreibzugriffe serialisiert. Das führt, insbesondere wenn man eine Datenbank drauf laufen lassen möchte, zu einer Performance, die man nicht wirklich jemandem vorführen kann.
Wer betreibt nennenswerte Datenbanken auf MacOS X ? 
Aber mal ernsthaft: Ich frage mich bei den performanceseitigen Vergleichen von Betriebsystemen und Filesystemen immer, ob die Filesystem wirklich das tun, was sie vorgeben zu tun. Ob ein Sync wirklich zum Sync fuehrt usw ... gerade bei Linux wird ja gern mal eine Abkürzung genommen, so das ich dort Vergleichszahlen immer mit einer Prise Salz zu mir nehme.
Aber mal ernsthaft: Ich frage mich bei den performanceseitigen Vergleichen von Betriebsystemen und Filesystemen immer, ob die Filesystem wirklich das tun, was sie vorgeben zu tun. Ob ein Sync wirklich zum Sync fuehrt usw ... gerade bei Linux wird ja gern mal eine Abkürzung genommen, so das ich dort Vergleichszahlen immer mit einer Prise Salz zu mir nehme.
+1
The LKSF book
The book with the consolidated Less known Solaris Tutorials is available for download here
Web 2.0
Contact
Networking
xing.com
LinkedIn
Facebook
My photos
- mail: joerg@c0t0d0s0.org
- icq: 144000169
- Me, myself and I
- openBC
- My del.icio.us
- c0t0d0s0@twitter
- c0t0d0s0@last.fm
- wiki@c0t0d0s0
- Amazon Wishlist
Networking
xing.com
My photos
Buttons
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Germany License
Blog Administration
Donate
Okay, okay ... as several people have asked for it ... but you know my opinion.