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

ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 331 posts

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#71

Post by [deleted] »

mustache_kimono wrote: post #70
ffsm8 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically speaking, bcachefs has been merged into the Linux Kernel - that makes your initial assertion wrong. But considering it's had two drama events within 1 year of getting merged... I think we can safely confirm your conclusion of it being really hard

> Technically speaking, bcachefs has been merged into the Linux Kernel - that makes your initial assertion wrong. bcachefs doesn't implement its erasure coding/RAID yet? Doesn't implement send/receive. Doesn't implement scrub/fsck. See: https://bcachefs.org/Roadmap , https://bcachefs.org/Wishlist/ btrfs is still more of a legit competitor to ZFS these days and it isn't close to touching ZFS where it matters. If the p…

[deleted]

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#72

Post by madeofpalk »

kwanbix wrote: post #64
poisonborz wrote: post #59

I just don't get it how the Windows world - by far the largest PC platform per userbase - still doesn't have any answer to ZFS. Microsoft had WinFS and then ReFS but it's on the backburner and while there is active development (Win11 ships some bits time to time) release is nowhere in sight. There are some lone warriors trying the giant task of creating a ZFS compatibility layer with some projects, but they are far f…

Honest question. As an end user that uses Windows and Linux and does not uses ZFS, what I am missing?

I'm missing file clones/copy-on-write.

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#73

Post by GuB-42 »

poisonborz wrote: post #59

I just don't get it how the Windows world - by far the largest PC platform per userbase - still doesn't have any answer to ZFS. Microsoft had WinFS and then ReFS but it's on the backburner and while there is active development (Win11 ships some bits time to time) release is nowhere in sight. There are some lone warriors trying the giant task of creating a ZFS compatibility layer with some projects, but they are far f…

To be honest, the situation with Linux is barely better.

ZFS has license issues with Linux, preventing full integration, and Btrfs is 15 years in the making and still doesn't match ZFS in features and stability.

Most Linux distros still use ext4 by default, which is 19 years old, but ext4 is little more than a series of extensions on top of ext2, which is the same age as NTFS.

In all fairness, there are few OS components that are as critical as the filesystem, and many wouldn't touch filesystems that have less than a decade of proven track record in production.

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#74

Post by lousken »

GuB-42 wrote: post #73
poisonborz wrote: post #59

I just don't get it how the Windows world - by far the largest PC platform per userbase - still doesn't have any answer to ZFS. Microsoft had WinFS and then ReFS but it's on the backburner and while there is active development (Win11 ships some bits time to time) release is nowhere in sight. There are some lone warriors trying the giant task of creating a ZFS compatibility layer with some projects, but they are far f…

To be honest, the situation with Linux is barely better. ZFS has license issues with Linux, preventing full integration, and Btrfs is 15 years in the making and still doesn't match ZFS in features and stability. Most Linux distros still use ext4 by default, which is 19 years old, but ext4 is little more than a series of extensions on top of ext2, which is the same age as NTFS. In all fairness, there are few OS compon…

as far as stability goes, btrfs is used by meta, synology and many others, so I wouldn't say it's not stable, but some features are lacking

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#75

Post by poisonborz »

kwanbix wrote: post #64
poisonborz wrote: post #59

I just don't get it how the Windows world - by far the largest PC platform per userbase - still doesn't have any answer to ZFS. Microsoft had WinFS and then ReFS but it's on the backburner and while there is active development (Win11 ships some bits time to time) release is nowhere in sight. There are some lone warriors trying the giant task of creating a ZFS compatibility layer with some projects, but they are far f…

Honest question. As an end user that uses Windows and Linux and does not uses ZFS, what I am missing?

Way better data security, resilience against file rotting. This goes for both HDDs or SSDs. Copy-on-write, snapshots, end to end integrity. Also easier to extend the storage for safety/drive failure (and SSDs corrupt in a more sneaky way) with pools.

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#76

Post by ryao »

poisonborz wrote: post #59

I just don't get it how the Windows world - by far the largest PC platform per userbase - still doesn't have any answer to ZFS. Microsoft had WinFS and then ReFS but it's on the backburner and while there is active development (Win11 ships some bits time to time) release is nowhere in sight. There are some lone warriors trying the giant task of creating a ZFS compatibility layer with some projects, but they are far f…

What do you mean by a ZFS compatibility layer? There is a Windows port:

https://github.com/openzfsonwindows/openzfs

Note that it is a beta.

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#77

Post by wil421 »

poisonborz wrote: post #75
kwanbix wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question. As an end user that uses Windows and Linux and does not uses ZFS, what I am missing?

Way better data security, resilience against file rotting. This goes for both HDDs or SSDs. Copy-on-write, snapshots, end to end integrity. Also easier to extend the storage for safety/drive failure (and SSDs corrupt in a more sneaky way) with pools.

How many of us are using single disks on our laptops? I have a NAS and use all of the above but that doesn’t help people with single drive systems. Or help me understand why I would want it on my laptop.

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#78

Post by dizhn »

nesarkvechnep wrote: post #35
endorphine wrote: post #25

Can someone describe why they would use ZFS (or similar) for home usage?

I'm trying to find a reason not to use ZFS at home.

Requirement for enterprise quality disks, huge RAM (1 gig per TB), ECC, at least x5 disks of redundancy. None of these are things, but people will try to educate you anyway. So use it but keep it to yourself. :)

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#79

Post by xattt »

GuB-42 wrote: post #73
poisonborz wrote: post #59

I just don't get it how the Windows world - by far the largest PC platform per userbase - still doesn't have any answer to ZFS. Microsoft had WinFS and then ReFS but it's on the backburner and while there is active development (Win11 ships some bits time to time) release is nowhere in sight. There are some lone warriors trying the giant task of creating a ZFS compatibility layer with some projects, but they are far f…

To be honest, the situation with Linux is barely better. ZFS has license issues with Linux, preventing full integration, and Btrfs is 15 years in the making and still doesn't match ZFS in features and stability. Most Linux distros still use ext4 by default, which is 19 years old, but ext4 is little more than a series of extensions on top of ext2, which is the same age as NTFS. In all fairness, there are few OS compon…

ZFS on OS X was killed because of Oracle licensing drama. I don’t expect anything better on Windows either.

Re: ZFS 2.3 released with ZFS raidz expansion

#80

Post by Timshel »

stavros wrote: post #68
chungy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that's really a caveat, it just means old data might be in an inoptimal layout. Even with that, you still get the full benefits of raidzN, where up to N disks can completely fail and the pool will remain functional.

Is that the case? What if I expand a 3-1 array to 3-2? Won't the old blocks remain 3-1?

I don't believe it supports adding parity drives only data drives.
Post reply on HN