DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2007-01
Was: Plans for 1.8+ (2.0?) Now: Filesystem support?
There's a huge niche that desperately needs to be filled for systems
that have huge
numbers of small files. ReiserFS went some of the way towards doing
that, but at
this point has pretty much officially flopped, and still has huge
issues, not the least
of which are Hans' personal ones. XFS and JFS don't have that as a
and have varying qualities of implementation under various *nix OS's,
tuning/performance options once you fill a TB with the previously
leave quite a bit to be desired.
I'm pretty much unfamiliar with ZFS, but for my own personal, selfish
needs, I need
a filesystem that can handle double-digit TB capacities, store a
bazillion ~4k files,
and deliver huge throughput to/from tons of TCP/IP clients.
As an aside, a good replacement for NFS or architecting around NFS's
would also be a plus.
Justin C. Sherrill wrote:
On Wed, January 31, 2007 3:18 pm, Matthew Dillon wrote:
I am seriously considering our options with regards to ZFS or a
ZFS-like filesystem. We clearly need something to replace UFS,
but I am a bit worried that porting ZFS would be as much work
as simply designing a new filesystem from scratch.
One of the reasons people are so excited about ZFS is because it solves
the problem of managing space. Disk management is and has always been a
pain in the rear, and ZFS goes a long way toward reducing that.
While constructing a new filesystem will help your goals, it will also
mean that DragonFly users miss out on having all the other advantages that
come with ZFS. Put another way, we're going to lose planned
Peter Serwe <peter at infostreet dot com>
"The only true sports are bullfighting, mountain climbing and auto racing." -Earnest Hemingway
"Because everything else requires only one ball." -Unknown
"Do you wanna go fast or suck?" -Mike Kojima
"There are two things no man will admit he cannot do well: drive and make love." -Sir Stirling Moss