Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

utcc.utoronto.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 124 posts

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#31

Post by Wowfunhappy »

throw0101a wrote: post #23
capitol_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incompatibility was very much intended, Sun needed a way to compete with linux and didn't want to be assimilated into the linux ecosystem, so they released opensolaris under CDDL instead of GPL or MIT. Oracle haven't re-licensed it for their own reasons. Here is some more info on the subject: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/feb/25/zfs-and-linux/

> The incompatibility was very much intended Nope. Simon Phipps, Sun's Chief Open Source Officer at the time, and the boss of Danese Cooper—who is the source of the claims it was intended—has stated it was not: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Development_and_Distrib... Brian Cantrill, the co-author of Dtrace, has also stated that that they were expecting the Linux folks to potentially incorporate their work: *…

Do you happen to know where the claim that it was intended came from?

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#32

Post by StavrosK »

Has anyone noticed really slow deletes on ZFS? I have a home NAS with RAIDZ and deleting a 1 GB file takes about 30 seconds. I asked on IRC repeatedly but the disks just aren't very busy during the delete (or at all) and nobody managed to figure out why this is happening.

It's been that way for years throughout various ZFS versions, and it's driving me crazy.

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#33

Post by StavrosK »

acd wrote: post #11

Insightful article. Zfs is the best file system. Ability to know that you do not have silent file corruption. Running without raid controllers. Feature to take snapshots super fast without waiting and that take little extra space. You can use Cache SSD with ZFS for read acceleration of physical disk. Transparent file compression. Good command line interface. Now you can take good actions with ZED for example sending…

I have a home NAS that has an SSD on it for the OS and four HDDs in RAIDZ. Does anyone know if/how I can use a small part/partition of the SSD for the cache? I don't need an entire SSD's worth of cache, and I'd rather not have to buy an extra one.

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#34

Post by StavrosK »

m0zg wrote: post #29
louwrentius wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would advice people to think about what they need. ZFS is fine, but it is overkill for most home applications and it has a pitfall related to extensibility. https://louwrentius.com/what-home-nas-builders-should-unders... https://louwrentius.com/the-hidden-cost-of-using-zfs-for-you... So it really depends on your needs. Statements as "ZFS is the best filesystem" are so meaningless. P.S. SSD caching often has no tang…

> ZFS is fine, but it is overkill for most home applications Yeah, not having silent data corruption is "overkill", sure. /s Why not use ZFS? It takes 15 seconds to install, and its CLI is fairly intuitive. Works fine. Costs $0. Why not, even for "home" applications? I could see how it could be unsuitable for "entreprise" applications where there are strict performance requirements etc, but for home, I wish I could u…

For one, because of the fact that you can't add an extra disk to your pool if you need to. GP is saying "plan better", no need to get snarky.

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#35

Post by mkj »

StavrosK wrote: post #32

Has anyone noticed really slow deletes on ZFS? I have a home NAS with RAIDZ and deleting a 1 GB file takes about 30 seconds. I asked on IRC repeatedly but the disks just aren't very busy during the delete (or at all) and nobody managed to figure out why this is happening. It's been that way for years throughout various ZFS versions, and it's driving me crazy.

Try temporarily setting sync=disabled ? If that speeds it maybe a fast ssd log device would fix it.

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#36

Post by StavrosK »

mkj wrote: post #35
StavrosK wrote: post #32

Has anyone noticed really slow deletes on ZFS? I have a home NAS with RAIDZ and deleting a 1 GB file takes about 30 seconds. I asked on IRC repeatedly but the disks just aren't very busy during the delete (or at all) and nobody managed to figure out why this is happening. It's been that way for years throughout various ZFS versions, and it's driving me crazy.

Try temporarily setting sync=disabled ? If that speeds it maybe a fast ssd log device would fix it.

Hmm, interesting, I'll try that, thanks!

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#37

Post by thecureforzits »

capitol_ wrote: post #18
spindle wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's trivial to use ZFS on NixOS, including on the root partition. The legal position is that ZFS is open source under a copyleft license but that many people think that it's illegal to bundle it with the Linux kernel because of some (I think unintended) incompatibilities between its license and the Linux kernel's license. Canonical (and some others) disagree, and think that it's legal. It's only the bundling that's…

The incompatibility was very much intended, Sun needed a way to compete with linux and didn't want to be assimilated into the linux ecosystem, so they released opensolaris under CDDL instead of GPL or MIT. Oracle haven't re-licensed it for their own reasons. Here is some more info on the subject: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/feb/25/zfs-and-linux/

I agree it was intended and I remember Sun talking about that intention at the time. Sun specifically removed the multiple license compatibility language (section 13) from the Mozilla MPL when creating the CDDL:

https://web.archive.org/web/20060816050912/http://www.sun.co...

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#38

Post by ghaff »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #31
throw0101a wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The incompatibility was very much intended Nope. Simon Phipps, Sun's Chief Open Source Officer at the time, and the boss of Danese Cooper—who is the source of the claims it was intended—has stated it was not: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Development_and_Distrib... Brian Cantrill, the co-author of Dtrace, has also stated that that they were expecting the Linux folks to potentially incorporate their work: *…

Do you happen to know where the claim that it was intended came from?

Because Danese Cooper said so. (See video link from the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Development_and_Distrib...)

I think there's also a general suspicion that Sun could have just chosen the GPL if they cared about compatibility. Although, for various reasons, it's probably at least somewhat more complicated than that because of patent protection, etc.

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#39

Post by mapgrep »

louwrentius wrote: post #28
acd wrote: post #11

Insightful article. Zfs is the best file system. Ability to know that you do not have silent file corruption. Running without raid controllers. Feature to take snapshots super fast without waiting and that take little extra space. You can use Cache SSD with ZFS for read acceleration of physical disk. Transparent file compression. Good command line interface. Now you can take good actions with ZED for example sending…

I would advice people to think about what they need. ZFS is fine, but it is overkill for most home applications and it has a pitfall related to extensibility. https://louwrentius.com/what-home-nas-builders-should-unders... https://louwrentius.com/the-hidden-cost-of-using-zfs-for-you... So it really depends on your needs. Statements as "ZFS is the best filesystem" are so meaningless. P.S. SSD caching often has no tang…

Disagree that data integrity is “overkill for most home applications.”

Re: In Praise of ZFS on Linux's ZED 'ZFS Event Daemon'

#40

Post by mapgrep »

viraptor wrote: post #17
diffeomorphism wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you comment on btrfs by comparison? Also, what is the status of the license incompatibility/integration of ZFS with distros? Canonical seems to think that shipping it with ubuntu is legal, but other distros seem less sure.

Btrfs has pretty much the same features listed above minus the cache drive handling. (You can still get the cache drive behaviour over bcache device) The raid has different modes, so you'll have to decide if what's available is enough for you. You can check the status of each feature here: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status

It’s also still considered experimental and according to kernel.org wiki “under heavy development.” ZFS was released for production use 14 years ago.
Post reply on HN