diana
Onderwerp: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A ZFS related question: How successful is
ZFS, really???
Does anyone have anything beyond own impressions and war stories?
Is anyone collecting statistics on storage solutions sold?
Hans J. Albertsson
>From my Nexus 5
Den 12 jan 2015 15:24 skrev &
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Hans J Albertsson <
hans.j.alberts...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your views, the serial storage (tape mostly?) problem is news to
> me but otherwise I concur.
>
While you can always "zfs send" the filesystem to a tape, it's "not
recommended" to do this sort of
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Jonathan Adams
wrote:
> ZFS is the most advanced filesystem on the planet IMHO, we have been using
> it for 10+ years in production.
>
+1
There is some fragmentation, Solaris 11 has an incompatible version of ZFS,
> at least for now.
>
>
In the same fashion as
Schweiss, Chip wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Andrew Gabriel <
illu...@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Since you mention Sun/Oracle, I don't see them pushing ZFS very much
anymore, although I am aware their engineers still work on it.
Oracle pushes ZFS hard and aggressively. I
Couple of points and counter points from my own experience.
*) tape really isn't dead. No, really. at about $.01/GB/copy, and 1x10^20
bit error rate, you can't beat it. Use it for the right thing though. This
excels as an offline archival media with media lifetimes expected at around
30 years. Cont
Does anyone have anything beyond own impressions and war stories?
Is anyone collecting statistics on storage solutions sold?
Hans J. Albertsson
>From my Nexus 5
Den 12 jan 2015 15:24 skrev "Schweiss, Chip" :
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Andrew Gabriel <
> illu...@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrot
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Andrew Gabriel <
illu...@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Since you mention Sun/Oracle, I don't see them pushing ZFS very much
> anymore, although I am aware their engineers still work on it.
>
Oracle pushes ZFS hard and aggressively. I dare you to fill out thei
Nexenta alone is probably around an Exabyte of licensed installations,
and that's a mix of displaced traditional storage vendors, and new
growth in old and new companies. There are many ZFS-based storage
vendors in addition to Nexenta. The traditional 'big 8' storage vendors
charged $9B for 9EB
most NAS systems that I've come across recently fall into 2 systems:
1) ZFS
2) Hardware RAID
there don't appear to be any other alternatives out there, and for my money
I wouldn't ever go back to hardware RAID, if the controller fails you can
lose everything!
We're not a Sun company, although we
Thanks for your views, the serial storage (tape mostly?) problem is news to
me but otherwise I concur.
I was mostly asking about success and market presence, i e is ZFS being
widely used in any non-Sun/Oracle part of the workplace?
Hans J. Albertsson
>From my Nexus 5
Den 12 jan 2015 12:38 skrev "
ZFS is the most advanced filesystem on the planet IMHO, we have been using
it for 10+ years in production.
There are reasons not to use it, but they are usually limitations not
related to ZFS itself.
We used to use tape backup for our old UFS systems, and it came as a shock
when we couldn't use t
I know FreeNAS has turned to ZFS only, OSv is ZFS only, and NAS
Appliances running ZFS turn up in unexpected places, but is it really
anything like an even half-baked "success", at least of sorts???
A "friend" (long time, extremely irritating acquantance) claims ZFS is a
complete failure, and
12 matches
Mail list logo
