Sun Releases ZFS 47
An anonymous reader writes "Sun's engineers have been blogging today that Sun has finally released its next generation filesystem, ZFS today by pushing out the "community" (i.e. testing) build 27 of OpenSolaris in source and binary form. There is also documentation and a a source code tour available on their site."
cool.. (Score:1)
Re:cool.. (Score:3, Informative)
From OpenSolaris License
3.6. Larger Works. You may create a Larger Work by combining Covered Software with other code not governed by the terms of this License and distribute the Larger Work as a single product. In such a case, You must make sure the requirements of this License are fulfilled for the Covered Software.
Re:cool.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Sometime in the future we'll have one kernel, where we can swap in and out any driver, scheduler, filesystem, device etc from Linux, BSD or Solaris, and compile it as a monolith or micro kernel.
Re:cool.. (Score:1)
Re:cool.. (Score:2)
One of the benefits of that is you get to avoid pissing contests such as the particularly nasty one between the VM subsystem hackers and Reiser & co. on LKML. Talk about miscommunication...
Re:cool.. (Score:1, Insightful)
Do you realise how long the HURD guys have been trying to get just one microkernel running flexibly and effectively? (allbeit a highly ambitious one...)
The only way to do what you describe would be to abstract everything to the degree that all your runtime dissappears into maintaining that abstraction. Oh, wait, I already mentioned HURD didn't I?
ZFS with DTrace are serious arguments for Solaris (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:ZFS with DTrace are serious arguments for Solar (Score:2)
Re:ZFS with DTrace are serious arguments for Solar (Score:2)
I am a slacker (pun intended), so, though I've been using Slackware for many years, I never found out why Pat thinks that 2.4 is better. I don't care. All I know is that the stable branch of 2.6 compiles and works perfectly.
Go Pat.
Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm astounded (Score:4, Insightful)
This is incredibly good news for Sun, and yet another astounding achievement this year.
They open-sourced Solaris (despite the whinging of the nay-sayers and accusations of being in bed with SCO^H^H^HCaldera), they sell Opteron workstations and servers running 64-bit Solaris, 8-core 32-thread Niagara (aka UltraSPARC T1) came out early (the first Sun processor to do so this decade) and now they've pushed out ZFS - the best filesystem ever devised.
If only they can get Project Janus integrated and out in the open...
Re:I'm astounded (Score:3, Interesting)
Is ZFS better then Reiser4 [namesys.com]?
Re:I'm astounded (Score:2)
Re:I'm astounded (Score:1)
Re:I'm astounded (Score:2)
It doesn't seem to have exactly the same goals.
I'm now waiting for a "true" and as unbiased as possible comparison between ZFS and Reiser, including the areas where they shine (from a flash demo, ZFS already shine in simplicity of administration and extensibility, you can setup a full FS in 4 lines in your console, and adding disks or quotas to an existing FS/array takes 1 line. It's smokin' impressive)
Re:And drop Java for Rails. (Score:2)
Sweet (Score:1)
Demo (Score:4, Informative)
They create 100 file systems in 20 seconds! Amazing!
They also have a demo (Score:1)
Impressive (Score:5, Informative)
I love:
``ZFS presents a pooled storage model that completely eliminates the concept of volumes and the associated problems of partitions''
As far as I understand it, there is no need to decide in advance how large your filesystems are going to be. Simply make all your disks one large ZFS pool, then create your filesystems (/,
``All operations are copy-on-write transactions, so the on-disk state is always valid.''
And that seems to go not just for the directory structure, but for the file contents, too.
``ZFS provides unlimited constant-time snapshots and clones.''
Another killer. Clones (writable copies, only the differences stored) are incredibly useful.
``There are no arbitrary limits in ZFS.
Heh. I guess 64-bit isn't arbitrary anymore?
I wonder about:
``if you enable compression on a swap volume, you now have compressed virtual memory.''
How about encrypted virtual memory?
Finally, I'm curious to see how this will stack up against Reiser4 in terms of features, performance, and everything.
Re:Impressive (Score:2)
Well, somewhat. There was a time once upon a time when mainframes used pooled storage....
Re:Impressive (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you played with Sol10/ZFS yet? I just got a new job and I've just convinced the CIO to purchase a bunch of X2100/4100s... w00t!
Anyway, they were set to make HP with Redhat the corporate standard but HP came in at 2x the price!
I hope this works out... cross whatever you've got two of for me...
Re:Impressive (Score:2)
Re:Impressive (Score:2)
Re:Impressive (Score:3, Informative)
You can limit the size of a ZFS filesystem (partition) to avoid the problem you describe. But when when you really do need more space, you're not limited by the initial partition size. Being able to resize partitions is very useful.
Re:Impressive (Score:2)
be normal directories?
Re:Impressive (Score:2)
Some links (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/docs/ [opensolaris.org]
(ZFS itself has just two commands btw)
Some basic UFS vs ZFS benchmarks:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/roch?entry=zfs_t
(I guess we'll have to wait and see if ZFS can beat UFS on all benchmarks by the time it ships with Solaris proper)
Party trick - silently recovering forced data corruption:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/timc?entry=demon
A user example of how ZFS's built-in error detection and correction can find hardware errors:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/elowe?entry=zfs_
Some background on RAS in file-systems:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/relling?entry=zf
ZFS vs Veritas for simplicity:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/timf?entry=zfs_i
You can config ZFS from a browser too if you want:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/talley?entry=man
How to trash your OSs with benchmarks:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/bill?entry=zfs_v
Can't yet be used as the boot file-system, but it's being worked on:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/tabriz?entry=zfs
Newness? Reliability? (Score:1)
The feature set for ZFS is certainly way cool. But I'm disturbed by the lack of emphasis on reliability. I've had nasty experiences with older Sun filesystems that didn't that didn't respond robustly to sudden loss of power. (Yes, there was a UPS. It's a long story.) By contrast, I've seen journalling file systems like XFS and NTFS simply laugh off that kind of problem.
OK, may
Re:Newness? Reliability? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Newness? Reliability? (Score:2)
Re:Newness? Reliability? (Score:2)
Re:Newness? Reliability? (Score:3, Interesting)
Tp.
Re:Newness? Reliability? (Score:1)
Why the hell isn't this on the front page?!?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Only 25 comments too. Apparently there is a definite audience to cater to now rather than providing actual news. Mustn't frighten the linux weenies. *sigh*
Re:Why the hell isn't this on the front page?!?! (Score:1)
CPL (Score:1)
I would hope it could be ported to linux, does anyone knows if the licence is compatible?
This looks like a very very promising filesytem!!
Re:CPL (Score:2)
Even if they did a "binary only" type release, you could still load the zfs module into the kernel and use the program.
GPL is not "viral". To believe that running something on Linux - even in the kernel space - means that you have to open your source to world means that you have been listening to too much MicroSoft FUD.
Windows users still waiting for WinFS... (Score:1)
I tried the WinFS beta a couple months ago, and was horrified with the amount of RAM it sucks. I got close to 300Mb running only Windows and the WinFS daemons; without any application running, and without using any feature of WinFS. If the best
BSD users are still waiting for a journalled fs (Score:2)
when will it arrive in OSX? (Score:2)
For this former solaris user, the real question is when Apple will pick it up so that I can use it easily.