Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OpenZFS 2.2.2 & OpenZFS 2.1.14 Released To Fix Data Corruption Issue

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

  • #11
    So, is this a Linux-only bug? Or FreeBSD is also affected by it?

    Comment


    • #12
      C and Z both update
      C causes issues with Z
      Therefore Z is wrong

      Think objectively
      More than one thing updated
      Y'all sound dumb as hell

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Rallos Zek View Post

        ZFS fails again!

        ZFS has been proven pretty flakey and unreliable for many years.
        Wow, you are brave. Or crazy.

        You just insulted ZFS, the sacred cow of filesystems that can do everything and save your data from corruption.

        You must be a Linux fanboy who loves Btrfs.

        Well, you better watch out, because the ZFS mafia is after you. They will make you pay for your words and make you suffer.

        They will spam you with ZFS lies, mock you with ZFS stats, bore you with ZFS stories. They will tell you that ZFS is perfect and flawless, the only solution for silent data corruption. They will bully you, threaten you, silence you.

        But don't worry, you are not alone. There are others who agree with you, have seen the truth and escaped the ZFS cult. There are others who have found a better, newer, faster way. Those have switched to a different filesystem that has all the cool features of Btrfs and ZFS, but none of the drawbacks. One filesystem that is faster, simpler, and more stable than Btrfs and ZFS. One that is still evolving.

        But I can't tell you the name of this filesystem, because it is a forbidden word here. If I say it out loud, the ZFS mafia will hear me, find me and kill me. They hate, fear and envy this filesystem and know that it's superior. It's the future and the ultimate threat to their monopoly. They know that it is the only filesystem that can rival, surpass and replace ZFS.

        So I will only give you a hint. It's made by a man who has created a masterpiece that can do what ZFS or other filesystem couldn't. This man has given us hope, freedom, progress and choice.

        But be careful, don't say it too loud. Please don't say it at all. The ZFS mafia is watching, listening and waiting. They will stop at nothing to destroy this filesystem, its creator and its users. They will stop at nothing to preserve their power, their prestige, their pride. They will stop at nothing to defend their filesystem, their religion, their god.

        ZFS fails again, again and again. But there's hope.‚Äč

        Comment


        • #14
          Nice. I've been playing with ZFSBootMenu for having a bunch of different distros multi-booting from a single pool. Now I can make it more official.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
            C and Z both update
            C causes issues with Z
            Therefore Z is wrong
            ??? It's not a bug in C though. Your analogy makes no sense.

            Remember when some old SSD drives didn't support queued TRIM but advertised support for it? And executing a TRIM under Linux would erase your data randomly? (Windows didn't support it at the time, so "it just worked" you know).

            I guess it was Linux's fault after all for using queued TRIM when the device told it that it supports it right? Obviously not the buggy SSD firmware.

            What a ZFS simp.

            Comment


            • #16
              good thing i switched to bcachefs

              Comment


              • #17
                Just a few hints... Though it most likely will only feed the trolls.

                Linux & BSD are one of the few OSes who support complex filesystems.

                ReFS added block cloning. But ReFS is limited to specific Windows editions and ... Well... Pretty much a black box.

                Given the complexity of ZFS and the complexity of filesystems in general, especially with features like sparse files, compression, asynchronity and so on... There are probably a few more silent killer bugs hidden. Not only in ZFS, but in all filesystems.

                If you read up on the bug reports, depending on Hardware and other factors, reproducing took sometimes 100_000 to 1_000_000 tries to trigger the bug. The time frame for the bug is in the micro second range.

                So no. Its not easy to catch.

                Neither is it easy to "logically" rule out that event A is properly handled.

                Take e.g. an HDD on PATA with 133 MB/s.

                Latency / access time, transfer time... Pretty much a turtle.

                Compare that with an PCI X 5 NVME...

                14_000 MB/s and latencies dropped from milliseconds to microseconds.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
                  C and Z both update
                  C causes issues with Z
                  Therefore Z is wrong

                  Think objectively
                  More than one thing updated
                  Y'all sound dumb as hell
                  Don't insult people when asking for objectivity. What ZFS was doing here was always flawed. Coreutils change just exposed that flaw. ZFS developers fortunately didn't call people dumb or engage in false finger pointing. They fixed the data corruption bug in their filesystem. All widely used filesystems have had data corruption bugs before. ZFS is not perfect either and that's ok to admit even if you are a ZFS user or especially if you are one. The lesson to learn here is: don't solely relying on filesystem features to protect you. Use backups, test your recovery procedures regularly and move on.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
                    ??? It's not a bug in C though. Your analogy makes no sense.

                    Remember when some old SSD drives didn't support queued TRIM but advertised support for it? And executing a TRIM under Linux would erase your data randomly? (Windows didn't support it at the time, so "it just worked" you know).

                    I guess it was Linux's fault after all for using queued TRIM when the device told it that it supports it right? Obviously not the buggy SSD firmware.

                    What a ZFS simp.
                    C is for Coreutils and Z for ZFS

                    Anyways, all y'all make me realize how silly I sound when I bring up that whole BTRFS Zstd debacle and blame BTRFS.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      updated https://t2sde.org/packages/openzfs

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X