On Oct 15, 2011, at 12:31 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 15/10/11 2:43 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Oct 15, 2011, at 6:14 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tim Cook
In my example - probably not a
Here is the out put from: zdb -vvv smbpool/glusterfs 0x621b67
Dataset smbpool/glusterfs [ZPL], ID 270, cr_txg 1034346, 20.1T, 4139680
objects, rootbp DVA[0]=5:5e21000:600 DVA[1]=0:5621000:600 [L0 DMU
objset] fletcher4 lzjb LE contiguous unique double size=400L/200P
This subject may have been ridden to death... I missed it if so.
Not wanting to start a flame fest or whatever but
As a common slob who isn't very skilled, I like to see some commentary
from some of the pros here as to any comparison of zfs against btrfs.
I realize btrfs is a lot less
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com wrote:
This subject may have been ridden to death... I missed it if so.
Not wanting to start a flame fest or whatever but
As a common slob who isn't very skilled, I like to see some commentary
from some of the pros here as
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com wrote:
My main reasons for using zfs are pretty basic compared to some here
What are they ? (the reasons for using ZFS)
and I wondered how btrfs stacks up on the basic qualities.
I use ZFS @ work because it is the only FS we
Or, if you absolutely must run linux for the operating system, see:
http://zfsonlinux.org/
On Oct 17, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Freddie Cash wrote:
If you absolutely must run Linux on your storage server, for whatever reason,
then you probably won't be running ZFS. For the next year or two, it
Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com writes:
If you only want RAID0 or RAID1, then btrfs is okay. There's no support for
RAID5+ as yet, and it's been in development for a couple of years now.
[...] snipped excellent information
Thanks much, I've very appreciative of the good information. Much
