I don't see any mention of data integrity...
Unless you use multi-key encryption.
I find that a bit odd.
Apple File System
311–320 of 406 posts
Re: Apple File System
#312I don't see any mention of data integrity...
Unless you use multi-key encryption.
I find that a bit odd.
Re: Apple File System
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was excited to until I read the limitations section. Can't be used as the startup disk and doesn't work with time machine. Hopefully this with change in the next macOs release.
Sure, this is a developer preview. Final release in 2017 will surely make this FS the default.
How can it be the "default" when you can't use it on a Fusion Drive or any system volume?
Re: Apple File System
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's so frustrating watching tiny incremental backups take forever over the network While waiting for APFS to become stable, buy Carbon Copy Cloner. $40. I love it. It's fundamentally rsync, but tailored to OS X. For personal use a single license covers an entire household. Every night CCC fires up on each laptop and each does an incremental clone to its own dedicated directory on my desktop machine. This clone is us…
Not trying to troll, but I see so many HN comments about backups and I just don't have this need anymore. What are people using traditional backup software like time machine, carbon copy cloner, etc. for on their laptop these days? I use google docs for all my docs and spreadsheets, occasionally I use excel or word or keynote for files but if I do I save the docs to my dropbox or google drive folder, I have my photos…
The scenario you describe involves no true "backups". It's probably better to say that you only have original copies, albeit resilient to failure of local hardware. Cloud services have data-loss events, due to both technical and business reasons. They're vulnerable to a variety of SPOFs out of your control or visibility.
I've known so many people over the decades who trusted some online provider to reliably store the only copy of critical data, only to be burned. Even providers that you would have thought should be bulletproof.
My rule of thumb, based on data loss studies, is to have three copies of any critical data. Any cloud provider should only be considered to be one copy.
Re: Apple File System
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not trying to troll, but I see so many HN comments about backups and I just don't have this need anymore. What are people using traditional backup software like time machine, carbon copy cloner, etc. for on their laptop these days? I use google docs for all my docs and spreadsheets, occasionally I use excel or word or keynote for files but if I do I save the docs to my dropbox or google drive folder, I have my photos…
- Some people don't want to use the cloud to store their stuff for privacy / ethic / commercial / legal reasons. - Some others have been burnt by the cloud failing them (corruption, data loss, copyright abuse, etc) and want an additional layer of security. - There are many activities that are fully not covered by the cloud, such as 3D / video / music edition, art in general, programming (all those dev envs)... - You…
What's wrong with sex tapes in the cloud?
Re: Apple File System
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
ZFS de-duplication will eat all of the RAM you can throw at it. Otherwise, it is basically the SLUB memory block allocator that was used in the Linux kernel for a while. So yes, it can run on watchOS-level amount of RAM.
ZFS data deduplication does not require much more ram than the non-deduplicated case. Performance will depend heavily on IOPS when the DDT entries are not in cache, but the system will run slowly even with miniscule RAM.
In my experience, ZFS will choke out the rest of the system RAM, and swap like crazy, killing the system.
Re: Apple File System
#317Forgive my ignorance, but what benefits would an average user experience with this new file system?
In theory (the practical side is tricky to get right):
- More resilience against data corruption for one due to copy on write and likely checksumming - so in theory power failure should not harm the filesystem and you can roll back to a last known state and only lose data for the last few seconds if at all.
- Snapshots, before installing updates you can snapshot the filesystem and roll back instantly. You could also create a readonly snapshot to have consistent backups. This should also allow seamless rollback of OS updates. There are also clones supported e.g. multiple diverging versions of a file tree - think something similar to git branches on a filesystem level.
- Native encryption at the filesystem level
- Possible better handling of metadata. Faster access to directories with lot's of files, more files on a volume without slowdown.
- Sparse files - you can create huge files instantly and fill them later, guess it's important for various types of software e.g. virtual machine images.
But as nice as these properties are in theory history showed that that in practice a lot can go wrong.
Re: Apple File System
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see why there would be conflicts going case sensitive -> case insensitive, but I can't see why there would be conflicts going the other way. Am I missing something?
If you have a file named "MyFile.txt" and another system is looking for "myfile.txt", then it'll not be found and Apple will not let you rename it because it thinks it's a no-op. That's frustrating as hell.
Apple's software (Finder, mv) lets you rename these. But it's true that some tools (I think git) get confused here.
Re: Apple File System
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I still don't see where you get a conflict copying the contents of a case-insensitive file system to a case-sensitive one. Because some apps create MyFile.txt and expect to be able to access it later by myfile.txt. Adobe's applications, for example.
I had no idea. That's horrifying.
Open up the various folders of Adobe's software (on Windows). The DLLs are a mish-mash of all lowercase and upper-lower mixes. Heck, open up System32; the DLLs there are definitely not case-sensitive capable (`kbd*.dll' being one example). In fact, I bet you there's at least one program on your computer that accesses the Program Files using `C:\PROGRAM FILES (X86)' instead of `%programfiles(x86)%'. In fact, even environment variables aren't case-sensitive.
Re: Apple File System
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
ZFS is on a completely open source license. Oracle's beef with Google comes from actions that occurred before Java was open sourced. It's hard to see how the two scenarios are even remotely related, other than "Oracle"
Open-source is great, but if that source is covered by patents you're potentially liable for damages. Nobody would ever willingly expose themselves to that.
When Apple dropped ZFS, Sun was in the middle of a lawsuit with NetApp regarding ZFS. If I recall correctly, Apple wanted Sun to be on the hook in the event of any possible patents, but they balked. Apple isn't going to touch ZFS.