Orvar Korvar wrote: > Yes, it is definitely ZFS that is eating up all your RAM, as it Enterprise > file system. If you would like, give up ZFS and you would get a much faster > system, as you have more RAM for the Enterprise OS: Solaris. But to me, ZFS' > superior file security is certainly worth more RAM. I would not like to loose > files due to silent corruption or the like. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > desktop-discuss mailing list > desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org > Infeed quite a big tradeoff, ZFS is one of the main advantages over other UNIX-like systems. FreeBSD 7 has ZFS support as well for those who are interested, as it doesn't have to deal with such strict licensing policies. DTrace, Java support, and Sun Studio integration are the things that make a big difference to me, and ZFS is more than just useful, I have my /export/home mirrored onto a USB disk, and in addition to great performance, it saves the hassle of making manual tar backups. Speaking of security, cryptologically speaking ZFS has made great strides enabling encryption for ZFS pools, which eliminate the need to use loopback filesystems and a slew of commands. Personally, 4GB of ram is the next upgrade I will make, as xVM is more of a memory hog than ZFS on my system. I can live without xVM as BrandZ works decently, just be nice if it had 2.6 kernel support and a newer supported userland. Alas, patience is key, so it's obviously a factor to stick with what works. I keep OpenSolaris and Solaris in the back of my mind for customers, as I am a consultant, but I don't always recommend it if the situation calls for certain features or functionality which are economically more thesible. Capping ZFS' cache will indefinitely help if you're on a system with 2GB or less ram, and it still functions quite well even constrained, granted it has 256MB as a minimal to grow upon.
James
