ZFS On Linux 0.8.3 Released With Many Fixes

[starshipeleven]

SELinux support. NFS and SAMBA support.

Wait, what has a filesystem to do with SELinux, NFS and SMB support. As long as it has POSIX ACLs (i.e. it is not garbage like ex/FAT/32 or Linux's FUSE NTFS) it will work.

[starshipeleven]

removed

"degenerates like him belong on a cross" (something something FalloutNV something something)

[starshipeleven]

It also has nothing to do with systemd units (despite some trying to flip any tunable they can), because the problem happens much sooner - it cannot find the rootfs, got it? That happens way before systemd looks up which units to launch. Oh, and it is broken with 0.8.x only, 0.7.x works. It also means that there are machines that cannot update, which never happen with any other filesystem, not even btrfs.

FYI: systemd is used in the initramfs in many distros, Fedora, OpenSUSE and Arch among others. It's usually the case if they are using dracut tool to assemble it.

Actually getting initramfs to work correctly is a more arcane art than it may look like, especially now that bulk of the job is done by tools by dracut and such, and people that actually know what goes on are more scarce.

For example I never found a way to have ZFS services properly loaded in the initramfs stage AT ALL in OpenSUSE.

[starshipeleven]

Also, the take-home knowledge is to never use zfs for root file system. Ever.

My experiences are the exact opposite of that. I wouldn't trust BTRFS to hold easily re-obtainable porn.

OMG guys, what is this "it has hurt me and I will never talk to him again ever ever ever, I hate him!" teenage angst bullshit.

What is actually true is that there are only some distros where it's actually possible to use root on ZFS.

Currently the only distros where I know people use ZFS on root regularly are Fedora (there are tutorials) and Arch, plus there is Trident Linux that should eventually become a Void Linux respin with ZFS root support and boot environments.

[NotMine999]

Please stop treating Phoronix forums as if they are /.

[NotMine999]

Anyways, it seems like everyone and their Mom has a horror story about *insert Advanced Disk Format here*. Like how ours are opposite of one another with BTRFS and ZFS. I'm sure there is, or will be, someone who reads our discussion and goes "Y'all are some dumb fucks. They both suck. LVM and Ext4 is where it's at".

Nicely said.

[numacross]

Wait, what has a filesystem to do with SELinux, NFS and SMB support. As long as it has POSIX ACLs (i.e. it is not garbage like ex/FAT/32 or Linux's FUSE NTFS) it will work.

I think they mean integration support of NFS and SAMBA in ZFS. Instead of having to configure them separately you can easily share datasets via the ZFS command line tools.
Some people prefer their stacks to be tightly integrated like ZFS is while others prefer to mix and match layers and those use md, LVM, LUKS, dm-integrity, <insert your NFS server here>, SAMBA. Both have pros and cons of course.

What is actually true is that there are only some distros where it's actually possible to use root on ZFS.

Currently the only distros where I know people use ZFS on root regularly are Fedora (there are tutorials) and Arch, plus there is Trident Linux that should eventually become a Void Linux respin with ZFS root support and boot environments.

Proxmox does it as well and I think it's one of the default installation options. It also has deep integration for ZFS features including ZFS over iSCSI.

[pkese]

Why are the debates always so emotional, whenever someone mentions ZFS (or ZFS and heavensforbid btrfs)?
E.g. no one is yelling at each other when there's debate about ext4 and XFS...

P.S. I'm not trying to understand the factual and technical part of the story. I'm trying to understand the emotional part. It seems as if someone is getting hurt or something?

[DanL]

Don't forget to thank Mr Ellison <vulgarity>

Ellison deserves about as much credit for ZFS as he does for Linux.

[starshipeleven]

I think they mean integration support of NFS and SAMBA in ZFS. Instead of having to configure them separately you can easily share datasets via the ZFS command line tools.

Is there people actually trusting a filesystem tool to set up a shared folder?

I guess it's ok for basic stuff, but I'm not trusting a middle man to tame NFS and Samba for what I usually use them for.

Proxmox does it as well and I think it's one of the default installation options.

Yeah, but it's a virtualization appliance distro (i.e. it's a host for KVM virtual machines) so its abilities to share folders are somewhat limited.

I mean OK it is Debian so you can just use SSH to do things, but I wouldn't mind something that kinda looks like FreeNAS or OpenMediaVault web interface for setting up shares and stuff, it's an appliance after all.