On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 02:43:37PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > 16.01.2020 4:41, Ed Maste wrote: > > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 16:10, Eugene Grosbein <eu...@grosbein.net> wrote: > >> > >> There are multiple scenarios there ZFS may be sub-optimal at least: small > >> i386 virtual guests > >> or 32-bit only hardware like AMD Geode, or big amd64 SSD-only systems with > >> bhyve and multiple guests > >> that need lots of memory and should not fight with ZFS for RAM etc. > > > > That may well be the case, but our defaults should represent the > > configuration that's desirable to the largest set of users, and IMO > > that's ZFS in most cases today. > > > > It might be that we should default to UFS on i386 and ZFS on amd64? > > UFS may be better for any virtual guest having RAM less or equal to 4GB.
Why? _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"