On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, Ivan Voras wrote: > Robert Watson wrote: > >> I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet in the thread, but another >> thing worth taking into account in considering the stability of ZFS is >> whether or not Sun considers it a production feature in Solaris. Last I >> heard, it was still considered an experimental feature there as well. > > Last I heard, rsync didn't crash Solaris on ZFS :) My admittedly second-hand understanding is that ZFS shows similarly gratuitous memory use on both Mac OS X and Solaris. One advantage Solaris has is that it runs primarily on expensive 64-bit servers with lots of memory. Part of the problem on FreeBSD is that people run ZFS on sytems with 32-bit CPUs and a lot less memory. It could be that ZFS should be enforcing higher minimum hardware requirements to mount (i.e., refusing to run on systems with 32-bit address spaces or <4gb of memory and inadequate tuning). Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of CambridgeReceived on Sun Jan 06 2008 - 16:08:55 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:25 UTC