Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An Exciting Btrfs Update With Encoded I/O, Fsync Performance Improvements

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

  • #51
    Originally posted by rleigh View Post

    Loop devices are not even close to ZFS zvols in terms of the features offered. They aren't just exposing a file as a device node. They are based on the ZFS DSL layer just like ZFS datasets, supporting nearly all of the properties you can set on datasets such as copies=n, compression, encryption, logbias etc. And being based on the DSL they support copy-on-write transactions just like dataset writes, so you can snapshot them, clone them, send/recv them etc., just like datasets. You can use them as the backing storage of virtual machines and then continuously and transparently snapshot them and offload the VM state while it's running, for example. Or clone it and fire up a new VM based on the old one, all while the old one is running. You can't do that with loopback devices.
    More buzzwords.

    In btrfs, you just create the backing file on a separate subvol. Bam, problem solved. No buzzwords needed.
    Last edited by intelfx; 24 March 2022, 10:26 PM.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by reza View Post

      Do you use EXT4 for your root and ZFS for other partitions? Can you explain a bit more and share how your hard disk structure is? Thanks!
      Sorry, been away for a few days and I have over 2000 notification in my inbox here.

      Yes. I'm currently using use the standard Manjaro ext4 setup and systemd mounts my ZFS stuff under /zeta/blah/yada. Unless I'm trying some esoteric setup out, my standard install method is to just go with the distribution defaults and install a zfs-dkms package. Due to using the dkms packages, if I'm using a distribution like Fedora or Arch that updates the kernel faster than OpenZFS has releases I'll also install a linux-lts package or compile my own so I don't upgrade and lose access to my non-root data (I did the same thing a decade ago when I had my last Nvidia GPU -- I consider it good practice to have a backup kernel when I use and rely on out of tree modules).

      My current disk structure is Linux on a 480GB SDD, a ZFS zraid using 3 4TB HDDs, and a 1TB NVMe with Windows that hasn't been booted in a month or so. I've been considering wiping Windows and using that disk to hack together SteamOS on a ZFS root.

      The way I see it: Valve has the January Arch ISO on their mirror. I reckon I could just use that ISO, change the Arch repos to Valve's, add some keyrings, do a standard Arch install, add some SteamOS pakcages, and BAM: SteamOS 3.

      Here's my actual ZFS mountpoints to give you an idea of how I use it for my desktop stuff:

      Code:
      NAME                         PROPERTY     VALUE                   SOURCE
      zeta                         mountpoint   /zeta                   default
      zeta                         compression  lz4                     local
      zeta/layer                   mountpoint   /zeta/layer             default
      zeta/layer                   compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/documents         mountpoint   /zeta/documents         local
      zeta/layer/documents         compression  zstd-19                 local
      zeta/layer/games             mountpoint   /zeta/games             local
      zeta/layer/games             compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/games/emulation   mountpoint   /zeta/games/emulation   local
      zeta/layer/games/emulation   compression  zstd-19                 local
      zeta/layer/games/pc          mountpoint   /zeta/games/pc          local
      zeta/layer/games/pc          compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/games/pc/windows  mountpoint   /zeta/games/pc/windows  local
      zeta/layer/games/pc/windows  compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/music             mountpoint   /zeta/music             local
      zeta/layer/music             compression  zstd-19                 local
      zeta/layer/pictures          mountpoint   /zeta/pictures          local
      zeta/layer/pictures          compression  zstd-19                 local
      zeta/layer/programs          mountpoint   /zeta/programs          local
      zeta/layer/programs          compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/programs/linux    mountpoint   /zeta/programs/linux    local
      zeta/layer/programs/linux    compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/programs/storage  mountpoint   /zeta/programs/storage  local
      zeta/layer/programs/storage  compression  zstd-19                 local
      zeta/layer/programs/windows  mountpoint   /zeta/programs/windows  local
      zeta/layer/programs/windows  compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/projects          mountpoint   /zeta/projects          local
      zeta/layer/projects          compression  lz4                     inherited from zeta
      zeta/layer/videos            mountpoint   /zeta/videos            local
      zeta/layer/videos            compression  zstd-19                 local
      As you can see I alternate between speedy LZ4 and Jesus Christ Why ZSTD-19. Everything 19 is stuff that will only ever be written the one time so I give it the one time overkill pass to compress as much as possible. All the LZ4 stuff is read/write data. Both open LZ4 and ZSTD open files extremely fast so I consider them to be the best choices for read/write and write once data.
      Last edited by skeevy420; 26 March 2022, 08:11 AM.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
        It's going to be real fun to see the BTRFS reactions when OpenZFS lands the patchset for adding disks to a RAID-5/6 later this year.

        No only is RAID-5/6 terminally broken on BTRFS, but expansion has been probably the only real feature BTRFS has had over ZFS.

        At this rate somebody'll evolve RedoxFS into the next ZFS replacement and merge that into the kernel before BTRFS's RAID is usable. In other words: the end of the universe.
        If you're crazy like me you can do ZFS expansion now without the loss of space the upcoming method will have.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by theriddick View Post
          Every time BTRFS is mentioned, someone from ZFS arena appears claiming its better. The openZFS driver for windows hasn't received a update for 3yrs btw.

          I still sometimes boot into windows to do special windows only tasks (I don't want to); so winbtrfs works pretty well with the exception of a crash bug in specific cases which is being investigated/fixed atm.

          ZFS does sound like a better fit for server/workstation use where someone is doing fancy raid and partitioning stuff. For general desktop user, btrfs is just better imo.
          8 months. That's when the last commit was.

          You can use ZFS on Windows VIA WSL2. Granted, you can use ANY Linux file system like that on Windows. It can be damn handy to open Linux directories in Windows Explorer.

          Personally, I'd do that, using the Linux driver in a VM, over using the currently available ZFS or BTRFS Windows drivers (no reason other than just me being overly paranoid and cautious).

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by Paradigm Shifter View Post
            I'm a relative newcomer to ZFS (generally preferring more mature filesystems like ext4 or XFS) so am still finding my way, but on the systems I'm currently running ZFS (all two of them...) I use ext4 for /root and /home, ZFS with RAID-Z1 on three SATA SSDs for "fast" data, RAID-Z1 or Z2 across either 4 or 6 high capacity HDDs for "slow" data. It's been well behaved enough that I will probably expand ZFS to a few other systems as time permits, and get more adventurous with what I do. It was incredible easy to set up and so far has coped with the one time I managed to run out of RAM (on an 1.5TB system... oops...) gracefully (read: I didn't lose any data).
            Thanks for your reply. Do you happen to dual-boot your Linux with other OSes (say Windows, MacOS, etc.) My last reason for sticking with ext4 on my data partition/disk, is it can be shared by all my OSes and recognized in a read/write access mode. Now, I know that BTRFS also has driver for other OSes. but not ZFS, eh? What do people do in this regard?

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
              As you can see I alternate between speedy LZ4 and Jesus Christ Why ZSTD-19. Everything 19 is stuff that will only ever be written the one time so I give it the one time overkill pass to compress as much as possible. All the LZ4 stuff is read/write data. Both open LZ4 and ZSTD open files extremely fast so I consider them to be the best choices for read/write and write once data.
              Thank you very much. It was very beneficial for me. So I guess you are okay with not having access to the 4TB HDDs under Windows? I haven't booted in Windows in a long time either, but I'm still not comfortable with the thought that, if I go with ZFS, my data drive is going to be Linux-exclusive and wouldn't be available in other OSes. Your thoughts?

              P.S. I looove ZFS though.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by reza View Post

                Thank you very much. It was very beneficial for me. So I guess you are okay with not having access to the 4TB HDDs under Windows? I haven't booted in Windows in a long time either, but I'm still not comfortable with the thought that, if I go with ZFS, my data drive is going to be Linux-exclusive and wouldn't be available in other OSes. Your thoughts?

                P.S. I looove ZFS though.
                I suspect that you're about to love me

                Why? Because I'm perfectly okay having access to my ZFS HDDs on Windows in Windows Explorer.

                In fact, we can access any Linux FS on Windows with WSL2. Because of WSL2 we don't have to worry about our data drive format when we're dual booting with Windows anymore. It's great

                See This and This and This. Those will have all the information you'll need to get yourself setup with OpenZFS and any other Native Linux file system on Windows 10 and 11.

                Comment


                • #58
                  There is also a windows port of OpenZFS, though I don't know if it's 100% stable yet. The wonders of being a very cross-OS filesystem.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                    I suspect that you're about to love me

                    Why? Because I'm perfectly okay having access to my ZFS HDDs on Windows in Windows Explorer.

                    In fact, we can access any Linux FS on Windows with WSL2. Because of WSL2 we don't have to worry about our data drive format when we're dual booting with Windows anymore. It's great

                    See This and This and This. Those will have all the information you'll need to get yourself setup with OpenZFS and any other Native Linux file system on Windows 10 and 11.
                    You keep providing information that needs way more than just one like.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by theriddick View Post
                      For general desktop user, btrfs is just better imo.
                      And yet after my last BTRFS corruptions issues only a month or so ago I have MOVED over ALL my desktops to ZFS from BTRFS for root too. Things XFS, EXT4, ZFS have that BTRFS doesn't? Consistency in performance (4x-10x slower between distros) and reliability. The day XFS gets compression and data checksumming I'll move off zfs for desktops. I'm tired of having filesystem corruption making my btrfs snapshots useless and requiring full drive formats to fix.

                      Unfortunately I have frequent power cuts (ups dies and eventually batteries don't hold) - BTRFS just doesn't survive - not to mention deduplication apps are very buggy, ZFS builtin and 0 issues. I have only had good results from power cuts with XFS and ZFS and I have 5 desktops in the house that used to have issues with BTRFS and power cuts ranging from Pop to Arch based. I only moved to BTRFS for all, around August last year from XFS (no issues with XFS just wanted to ride the btrfs hype).

                      Each year I try btrfs (4 and counting) for now I'll leave BTRFS to those with time and reliable electricity (Facebook etc).
                      Last edited by dfyt; 31 March 2022, 11:44 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X