[OpenAFS] Overview? Linux filesystem choices

Robert Milkowski milek@task.gda.pl
Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:52:17 +0100

On 30/09/2010 18:05, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> On 9/30/2010 12:53 PM, Vincent Fox wrote:
>>   On 9/30/2010 6:40 AM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
>>> Getting back the data your wrote is a hard
>>> problem.  ZFS presumes that everything
>>> downstream of it will (eventually) fail.  There
>>> is overhead there, but it does solve a set
>>> of problems that other solutions do not.
>>> (And the highly paranoid presume ZFS will
>>> fail, so take different precautions).
>> I've seen 3 RAID-5 sets have double-disk failures in the last 5 years.
>> I've seen one even have a triple-disk failure in a short timespan.
>> Too short for all that rebuild from hot spares business to work.
>> Granted, older disks on older system.
>> Everyone will say "yeah, but it's very unlikely and hasn't happened to ME".
>> I like ZFS RAID-10, I like it a LOT.  I don't think people understand how
>> good it really is, most are afraid of anything other than the OS
>> they run now and antique filesystems that have accreted decades
>> of "fixes" for design defects.  Do you trust black box RAID controllers?
>> I don't.  I really like being able to run scrub whenever I need to ensure
>> the data on the disk is correct.
>> It makes me sad that Oracle bought Sun, where it will probably wither.
>> If IBM had bought Sun I would have more hope of a good filesystem
>> for MacOS, Linux, etc.  in the near term.  ZFS has been stable and
>> in production for years now.  I like btrfs but it is years from
>> being ready for terabytes of production data.
> Bill Moore and Jeff Bonwick have both left Oracle.  It is certainly a
> sad day.

Bill is working for Nexenta and he is working on ZFS :)
He is supposed to give a talk on ZFS's future at Open Storage Summit - 
see http://nexenta-summit2010.eventbrite.com/

Robert Milkowski