11–20 of 35 posts
How compatible is this with FreeBSD? Can I test it alongside a FreeBSD distribution with minimal changes? Does it use the same Ports/Packages system? Do I need to recompile/reinstall all applications? Is there ZFS support?
In case people are wondering what makes DBSD so interesting, DragonflyBSD is: - focused only on x64 architecture - has an extremely small but exceptionally talented team of developers (e.g. Matt Dillon from DICE and Amiga fame) - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) - Network performance is particularly good with Dragonfly and even better than Fr…
You said "interesting", but superficially "a complete rewrite" WIP doesn't sound like a plus when choosing a production system OS.
If anyone is interested, this is what the DBSD man page says about hammer:
HAMMER file systems are designed for large storage systems, up to 1
Exabyte, and will not operate efficiently on small storage systems. The
minimum recommended file system size is 50GB. HAMMER must reserve 512MB
to 1GB of its storage for reblocking and UNDO/REDO FIFO. In addition,
HAMMER file systems operating normally, with full history retention and
daily snapshots, do not immediately reclaim space when files are deleted.
A regular system maintenance job runs once a day by periodic(8) to handle
reclamation.
HAMMER works best when the machine's normal workload would not otherwise
fill the file system up in the course of 60 days of operation.
[& p.s.] Hammer2: http://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/dragonfly.git/blob/b93cc2e081...
In case people are wondering what makes DBSD so interesting, DragonflyBSD is: - focused only on x64 architecture - has an extremely small but exceptionally talented team of developers (e.g. Matt Dillon from DICE and Amiga fame) - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) - Network performance is particularly good with Dragonfly and even better than Fr…
> - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) You said "interesting", but superficially "a complete rewrite" WIP doesn't sound like a plus when choosing a production system OS. If anyone is interested, this is what the DBSD man page says about hammer: HAMMER file systems are designed for large storage systems, up to 1 Exabyte, and will not operate eff…
With the advent of SSD and NVME, how you achieve maximum performance and ensure long term "disk" endurance has radically changed in recent years. You're no long write data to a physical platter anymore. Which radically changes huge fundamental assumptions in how legacy file systems were created 30-40 years ago.
So don't view a rewrite as a bad thing. It's Dragonfly being proactive and keeping up with the times.
Been looking for Skylake GPU support for BSD. Does it support Skylake OpenCL? How compatible is this with FreeBSD? Can I test it alongside a FreeBSD distribution with minimal changes? Does it use the same Ports/Packages system? Do I need to recompile/reinstall all applications? Is there ZFS support?
See https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/supportedhardware/
Re: FreeBSD. Dragonfly forked from FreeBSD around 11 years ago (v4.x). So the two have diverged quite a bit of the years. E.g. Different file systems. Different kernel approaches to SMP. Etc.
The package management system is the same though.
Anyone using DragonFly BSD in production? Or as a desktop system? What is your experience? I love the BSDs, but never used DragonFly.
I run a little VPS on DragonFlyBSD that I use for misc hobby projects and personal file hosting. Mostly it runs Postgres. It's quite fast. I had redis running on there as a message queue for a distributed web crawler for a while. I benchmarked it against Arch Linux (which is what I was using on that server before DragonFly) and it was somewhat faster. HAMMER is a really nice filesystem. It's not one of the fancy COW…
In case people are wondering what makes DBSD so interesting, DragonflyBSD is: - focused only on x64 architecture - has an extremely small but exceptionally talented team of developers (e.g. Matt Dillon from DICE and Amiga fame) - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) - Network performance is particularly good with Dragonfly and even better than Fr…
Matt Dillon does very impressive work, but the critical mass just isn't there.
In case people are wondering what makes DBSD so interesting, DragonflyBSD is: - focused only on x64 architecture - has an extremely small but exceptionally talented team of developers (e.g. Matt Dillon from DICE and Amiga fame) - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) - Network performance is particularly good with Dragonfly and even better than Fr…
The Intel device tested was their absolute lowest end consumer part. The 750 and above drives are completely different beasts, especially at the server level.
Anyone using DragonFly BSD in production? Or as a desktop system? What is your experience? I love the BSDs, but never used DragonFly.
In case people are wondering what makes DBSD so interesting, DragonflyBSD is: - focused only on x64 architecture - has an extremely small but exceptionally talented team of developers (e.g. Matt Dillon from DICE and Amiga fame) - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) - Network performance is particularly good with Dragonfly and even better than Fr…
> - has it's own unique filesystem called Hammer (and work is being down on Hammer2 which is a complete rewrite) You said "interesting", but superficially "a complete rewrite" WIP doesn't sound like a plus when choosing a production system OS. If anyone is interested, this is what the DBSD man page says about hammer: HAMMER file systems are designed for large storage systems, up to 1 Exabyte, and will not operate eff…
Hammer2 will, last I checked, enable multi-master clustered volumes plus replicated fanout mirrors and caching clients at the base system level (e.g. not an overlay application like other systems)
While there is a focus on keeping releases as stable as possible and the tip of the source tree stable, it is heavily under development so some amount of low-level expertise is probably a good idea.. which isn't to say you can't use it for day-to-day use.
Systems are used for different things - one being heavily under development doesn't necessarily mean it isn't suitable for some use cases
Been looking for Skylake GPU support for BSD. Does it support Skylake OpenCL? How compatible is this with FreeBSD? Can I test it alongside a FreeBSD distribution with minimal changes? Does it use the same Ports/Packages system? Do I need to recompile/reinstall all applications? Is there ZFS support?
Yes, Skylake is supported. See https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/supportedhardware/ Re: FreeBSD. Dragonfly forked from FreeBSD around 11 years ago (v4.x). So the two have diverged quite a bit of the years. E.g. Different file systems. Different kernel approaches to SMP. Etc. The package management system is the same though.
Shough package systems are based on the same code, syscall/binary level compatibility has diverged, so it does entail a separate installation on another partition/disk/etc and separate set of application packages, etc.