-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> why? zfs is slow and is mixing things that should be in different layers. One 
> argument against reiser4 always was 'it violates the layering' - well this is 
> even more true for zfs.
> 

If you can suggest a filesystem that has full redundancy and uses all my
disk space optimally I'll be happy to use it.  :)  Ideally I'd prefer
not to have to carefully map and partition my drives and be able to add
space on a whim, but maybe that is asking too much.  But ZFS allows all
of this. RAID5 does not.

In theory ZFS also has much better write performance than RAID5 -
because it doesn't need to read stripe before writing them most of the time.

Sure, it is a layering violation, but there really isn't any way to
implement this sort of scheme using layers.  If you separate the raid
layer from the FS layer then the raid has no idea whether a given block
of disk is safe to overwrite or not - so it has to read stripes before
writing them.  So, while I do like the flexibility of running any
filesystem on top of any lvm/md scheme I'll live with the inflexibility
if it gives me more capability.

As far as performance goes - ZFS is pretty immature - I'm sure it will
only improve.  Especially considering it only has the most minimal
support for linux right now.  Obviously I'd wait until something more
robust is available...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG9U+YG4/rWKZmVWkRAhM/AKC7oL99LD6rVBYWZT8FKX+3TfLGfQCgkToP
JO0yxcMT1ptvRbhN35GxNvk=
=Srvy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----