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

OpenZFS 2.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 151 posts

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#71

Post by muxator »

Jnr wrote: post #28
anderspitman wrote: post #8

I'd love to get rid of my FreeNAS VM and run ZFS directly on my Linux desktop, but having to mess with the kernel has kept me from attempting it so far. Maybe I'm worrying about nothing. btrfs seems like the main alternative if you want native kernel support, but when I checked a couple years ago there seemed to be a lot of concerns about the stability. Is that still the case?

I'm using btrfs and my system still works. :)

Me too. I have been running full btrfs since at least 5 years (single and RAID1 disks), which no data loss whatsoever. Now that there is support for swapfiles, I do not even need to create a dedicated partition for them.

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#72

Post by RantyDave »

nix23 wrote: post #16
vorpalhex wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a protocol problem, use a protocol such as rsync. You don't need to use redacted sends/recvs.

+1 for rsync, but with check-summing turned on, i think that's acceptable for 40GB.

It's not really enough for ZFS (unfortunately). It won't move snapshots, bookmarks etc.

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#73

Post by RantyDave »

hlandau wrote: post #5

Will OpenZFS on Linux ever be integrated with the Linux page cache?

ZFS isn't really designed for local 'temporary' file systems (IMHO). You don't really need to nest checksums, create snapshots or volume manage when you're slugging pages between ram and nvme.

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#74

Post by kbumsik »

nvllsvm wrote: post #41
kbumsik wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally use ZFS on Arch Linux. The DKMS package works almost out of the box and I haven't had any troubles. It takes a long time (but not too much) to compile though. Or you can use the latest Ubuntu that is shipped with ZFS.

Be aware of possible incompatibilities with the regular Arch kernel. I switched my NAS to linux-lts when a kernel point-release proved incompatible with openzfs.

Right, I forgot to mention I always use the LTS kernel, since I had getrandom() booting problem last year. https://lwn.net/Articles/800509/

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#75

Post by kbumsik »

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #59
kbumsik wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally use ZFS on Arch Linux. The DKMS package works almost out of the box and I haven't had any troubles. It takes a long time (but not too much) to compile though. Or you can use the latest Ubuntu that is shipped with ZFS.

Reporting in from Ubuntu 20.04 with ZFS on root. It works great. No issues so far, other than docker requires "zfs" as the storage-driver and doesn't support overlay2. See: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/zfs-linux/+bug/171...

Interesting. I thought overlay2 can be agnostic to the base filesystems.

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#76

Post by remram »

paulsmal wrote: post #23
weitzj wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The easiest way is using t Proxmox installer which has ZFS as a filesystem. Underneath it is a Debian 10 installation. Last time I tried you could not enable ZFS encryption. I don’t know what is the case with Openzfs 2.0 Do we have encryption,yet?

Ubuntu 20.10 has an option in installer to use ZFS encryption for root partition.

Oh sweet, I don't think encryption was an option in 20.04. Is it still under an "experimental" option in the installer?

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#77

Post by mlex »

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #57
mlex wrote: post #25

Just built a FreeNAS system over the past couple weeks and finished doing burn-in tests of my hard drives, wonder if I should wait and see how to install OpenZFS 2.0.0 before I create my storage config.

Aren't ZFS upgrades to existing vdevs really simple? I don't see any reason why you need to wait.

That’s the idea I’ve gotten when looking around online. I figured I was in the uncommon situation of having a completely blank and ready system, so I could afford to just wait a few days.

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#78

Post by koolba »

linsomniac wrote: post #51
anderspitman wrote: post #8

I'd love to get rid of my FreeNAS VM and run ZFS directly on my Linux desktop, but having to mess with the kernel has kept me from attempting it so far. Maybe I'm worrying about nothing. btrfs seems like the main alternative if you want native kernel support, but when I checked a couple years ago there seemed to be a lot of concerns about the stability. Is that still the case?

I've been running encrypted ZFS on 20.04 on my main workstation since it came out and it's worked great. Wrote up details here, it's a slight hack for encryption, no hack if you don't want crypto. https://linsomniac.gitlab.io/post/2020-04-09-ubuntu-2004-enc... A friend did a video based on my blog: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PILrUcXYwmc

Why ZFS encryption vs unencrypted ZFS atop LUKS?

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#79

Post by gilrain »

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #56
boston_sre87 wrote: post #53

Has there been any progress on the zfs on linux Linus disagreement front since this article? https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/01/linus-torvalds-zfs-s...

zfs on linux available as root partition since 20.04. Working quite well I might add!

It's still a big pain if you like to keep your kernel relatively up to date. I switched to btrfs; it just working is worth the few extra warts over ZFS.

Re: OpenZFS 2.0

#80

Post by nraynaud »

1over137 wrote: post #35
mlex wrote: post #25

Just built a FreeNAS system over the past couple weeks and finished doing burn-in tests of my hard drives, wonder if I should wait and see how to install OpenZFS 2.0.0 before I create my storage config.

FreeNAS 12 (now named TrueNAS) is already using OpenZFS 2.0, or very nearly.

Does it support NFS4.2?(fallocate, sparse files and server side copy)
Post reply on HN