On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:17:02PM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote: > Frank Bonnet wrote: > > It seems ZFS would match his needs , why don't use it ? > > Does ZFS really work on FreeBSD? It seems like every day someone is > posting about ZFS either getting corrupted or panicking their kernel.
It mostly seems to depend on the platform. I've got an aging Athlon 64 3200+ with 4GB of memory. I've been using ZFS in some capacity since the early 7.0 RC days. When I'd run FreeBSD/i386 there wasn't much I could do to prevent panics. I did all the recommended tuning mentioned on the FreeBSD wiki and I searched these lists and never could get a stable configuration. However, under amd64 I've never had a panic with ZFS. I was testing some pretty weird stuff, too, and ZFS was rock solid for me. I was running ZFS over geli, often with compression, taking snapshots every minute for an experimental script. Normal usage or stress-testing load, it never failed me. I'd even run ZFS with file-backed devices on top of ZFS or gjournal (both on top of geli), and no stability problems (though I wouldn't recommend such a setup for a production server). I know my account is purely anecdotal, but I've been a unix admin for a long time and I would trust ZFS with my personal data as well as with any any client's data if ZFS met requirements that couldn't be met with UFS2. I don't use ZFS on my workstation because I simply don't need the features and it's slower than UFS. For now, gjournal does an adequate job. -- Geoff P.S. -- I periodically check back at prgmr.com in hopes of seeing official FreeBSD guest support. I love your pricing, but I tend to avoid Linux if I can. Any thoughts on this? _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"