Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ZFS/Zsys Code Seeing Important Performance Fix Ahead Of Ubuntu 20.04 LTS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ZFS/Zsys Code Seeing Important Performance Fix Ahead Of Ubuntu 20.04 LTS

    Phoronix: ZFS/Zsys Code Seeing Important Performance Fix Ahead Of Ubuntu 20.04 LTS

    One of the new features to Ubuntu 20.04 LTS for those making use of ZFS On Linux with Canonical's Zsys manager is the automated APT snapshots on package transactions to be able to carry out system rollbacks if needed. An important fix around this functionality is on the way...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...Zsys-Slow-GRUB

  • #2
    Just for curiosity – did anybody test how ZOL's ZFS stability and it's recovery compares to BTRFS? Especially in cases like power loss.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by StarterX4 View Post
      Just for curiosity – did anybody test how ZOL's ZFS stability and it's recovery compares to BTRFS? Especially in cases like power loss.
      They are in different classes.

      ZFS is enterprise quality and so no.. it does not nor ever could suffer data loss due to power failure. It's on disk structure is always consistent. Also it's on disk structure has been stable for over 10 years.

      Pretty much nothing goes to such great of lengths for data integrity then ZFS being as it has a checksum for each and every individual block. I know of nothing else that is so paranoid but that comes at a cost too.

      BTRFS tho they are trying and high hopes is unfortunately at present consumer quality. It is fine for home use though.

      Last edited by k1e0x; 04-13-2020, 02:15 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        BTRFS tho they are trying and high hopes is unfortunately at present consumer quality. It is fine for home use though.
        I am not going to open yet another ZFS vs BTRFS discussion because I have read enough, however since when is SUSE a distribution for home use?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Charlie68 View Post
          I am not going to open yet another ZFS vs BTRFS discussion because I have read enough, however since when is SUSE a distribution for home use?
          Just trying to explain how it is. In enterprise nobody cares what filesystem is on your desktop, they care what the storage array is so ZFS vs BTRFS isn't really a thing.. it's ZFS vs NetApp vs Dell EMC. The kind of discussion where people talk about petabyte density per rack.. BTRFS unfortunately isn't in that discussion.

          However SuSE is a fine distro and it is perfectly good to use for a desktop or workstation. (SLES is the enterprise version)

          Comment


          • #6
            It is a shame ZFS is only supported in the (Gnome) Ubuntu installer.
            Worse, it requires you to kill your whole disk before making ZFS partitions. There is no ZFS support in advanced partitioning.
            Too bad, I was really interested in trying ZFS on the computer I am currently using. (Hanging from time to time, which requires hard reboot.) Will stay on OpenSUSE for now.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by k1e0x View Post

              Just trying to explain how it is. In enterprise nobody cares what filesystem is on your desktop, they care what the storage array is so ZFS vs BTRFS isn't really a thing.. it's ZFS vs NetApp vs Dell EMC. The kind of discussion where people talk about petabyte density per rack.. BTRFS unfortunately isn't in that discussion.

              However SuSE is a fine distro and it is perfectly good to use for a desktop or workstation. (SLES is the enterprise version)
              SUSE and SLE are the same thing, different from openSUSE, even if they belong to the same "family".
              SLE or SUSE use btrfs by default.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Charlie68 View Post

                SUSE and SLE are the same thing, different from openSUSE, even if they belong to the same "family".
                SLE or SUSE use btrfs by default.
                ... for the home user filesystem.. And that is fine. It isn't the same thing as a SAN holding corporate bank records or scientific research data.

                And SuSE isn't trying to use it that way.. all I'm saying is they are in different classifications as far as enterprise is concerned. You can use either for your own rig, or even fat32, nobody cares. It's like discussing what filesystem your phone uses.. : shrug :

                SuSE an Ubuntu are using these to provide cool features to users and that is good and great. You can do a lot of neat things with both. The question was how do they compare in tolerance and disaster recovery and there isn't much of a question there.. in that regard they have different use cases. as shown by enterprises adoption and reliance on one for mission critical use and not the other. There is a reason for that that has nothing to do with how people emotionally feel about either.

                One thing about home recovery is that ZFS boot environments seem to be superior. ZFS can undo anything short of a reformat.
                According to SuSE's documentation on BTRFS that is not the case with it and there are limitations and caveats.
                Last edited by k1e0x; 04-13-2020, 08:21 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by k1e0x View Post
                  One thing about home recovery is that ZFS boot environments seem to be superior. ZFS can undo anything short of a reformat.
                  According to SuSE's documentation on BTRFS that is not the case with it and there are limitations and caveats.
                  What sort of limits are you talking about? In my experience, snapshots in Btrfs and ZFS work equally well in keeping all of the old data intact. ZFS just has a more organized way of managing snapshots. I don't use SuSE, but I have the Btrfs subvolumes on my Arch installations configured in a way to support "snapper rollback", and it works perfectly for complete system restore. But how well that feature works depends on how you have your subvolumes configured.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Chugworth View Post
                    What sort of limits are you talking about? In my experience, snapshots in Btrfs and ZFS work equally well in keeping all of the old data intact. ZFS just has a more organized way of managing snapshots. I don't use SuSE, but I have the Btrfs subvolumes on my Arch installations configured in a way to support "snapper rollback", and it works perfectly for complete system restore. But how well that feature works depends on how you have your subvolumes configured.
                    See:
                    https://documentation.suse.com/sles/...a-snapper.html

                    7.3.3 Limitations
                    A complete system rollback, restoring the complete system to the identical state as it was in when a snapshot was taken, is not possible.
                    I noticed it can't rollback /boot either? odd.. It has a whole section about things excluded from the rollback too. I noticed Ubuntu does restore /boot on rollback so it can undo kernel changes. SuSE appears not to be able to do that? Maybe it's a layout thing or they can't boot off it? idk.

                    ZFS can rollback everything. You can delete entire datasets (or volumes) and restore them.

                    https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?...l&sektion=&n=1
                    Pool checkpoint
                    Before starting critical procedures that include destructive actions (e.g zfs destroy ), an administrator can checkpoint the pool's state and in the case of a mistake or failure, rewind the entire pool back to the checkpoint. Otherwise, the checkpoint can be discarded when the procedure has completed successfully. A pool checkpoint can be thought of as a pool-wide snapshot and should be used with care as it contains every part of the pool's state, from properties to vdev configuration.
                    Last edited by k1e0x; 04-14-2020, 02:21 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X