Roch Bourbonnais wrote: > Le 12 janv. 09 à 17:39, Carson Gaspar a écrit : > > >> Joerg Schilling wrote: >> >>> Fabian Wörner <fabian.woer...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> my post was not to start a discuss gpl<>cddl. >>>> It just an idea to promote ZFS and OPENSOLARIS!!!! >>>> If it was against anything than against exfat, nothing else!!! >>>> >>> If you like to promoote ZFS, you need to understand why the party >>> you like >>> to promote it to does not already use it ;-) >>> >> And for SDXC, ZFS will probably never be the filesystem of choice. >> Removable media of this type is mostly used in portable electronic >> devices, such as cameras, cellphones, etc. All of which are power, >> CPU, >> and memory limited. ZFS, while a marvelous filesystem, is incredibly >> RAM >> hungry. I suspect it's CPU profile is also non-trivial for a >> restricted >> performance device. >> > > I have not looked at it recently but for any access greater than ~ 16K > ZFS was more efficient than UFS. > It's just one partial data point but the conventional wisdom that ZFS > will use more cpu is not an absolute truth. > > Even more so for RAM, ZFS with 128K record make efficient use of > metadata. The only ram it needs to operation is 10 seconds of > of your workload's throughput and that can be tuned down in appliances. >
DOS/FAT filesystem implementations in appliances can be found in less than 8K code and data size (mostly that's code). Limited functionality implementations can be smaller than 1kB size. -- Andrew _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
