I am planning to use ZFS on my Centos 5.2 systems. The data I am storing is very large text files where each file can range from 10M to 20G. I am very interested on the compression feature of ZFS, and it seems no other native Linux FS supports it. My question are: Is ZFS stable? How does it scale for very large filesytems, ie, 2TB to 9TB? How is the performance of fuse? I plan to use it on my archive server first, so data reliability is very important Any thoughts or ideas? TIA
Mag Gam wrote:> I am planning to use ZFS on my Centos 5.2 systems. The data I am > storing is very large text files where each file can range from 10M to > 20G. I am very interested on the compression feature of ZFS, and it > seems no other native Linux FS supports it. > > My question are: Is ZFS stable? How does it scale for very large > filesytems, ie, 2TB to 9TB? How is the performance of fuse? I plan to > use it on my archive server first, so data reliability is very > important > > Any thoughts or ideas?I'd be surprised if anyone is using zfs/fuse/linux combinations seriously. Why not just run your archive server on opensolaris or freebsd where zfs runs natively? Or if you want to pretend it is a linux distro, perhaps nexenta http://www.nexenta.org/os or their commercial nexentastor version would work. They have a mostly-ubuntu userland running on an opensolaris kernel. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
On Dec 28, 2008, at 7:16 PM, Mag Gam wrote:> I am planning to use ZFS on my Centos 5.2 systems. The data I am > storing is very large text files where each file can range from 10M to > 20G. I am very interested on the compression feature of ZFS, and it > seems no other native Linux FS supports it. >Even if fuse implementation of ZFS looks rather stable, I won't suggest it in a production environment... We strongly wanted ZFS and we chose for Solaris 10 for our file server.> My question are: Is ZFS stable? How does it scale for very large > filesytems, ie, 2TB to 9TB? How is the performance of fuse? I plan to > use it on my archive server first, so data reliability is very > importantZFS really is great. We are now managing three 18Tb archives. It is not only reliable, it comes with zpool and zfs commands that really make it easy to manage! If you don't want Solaris, you can use FreeBSD 7 which supports native ZFS. d Davide Cittaro davide.cittaro at ifom-ieo-campus.it
Mag Gam wrote:> I am planning to use ZFS on my Centos 5.2 systems. The data I am > storing is very large text files where each file can range from 10M to > 20G. I am very interested on the compression feature of ZFS, and it > seems no other native Linux FS supports it. > > My question are: Is ZFS stable? How does it scale for very large > filesytems, ie, 2TB to 9TB? How is the performance of fuse? I plan to > use it on my archive server first, so data reliability is very > important > > Any thoughts or ideas?Try OpenSolaris. It comes with a package manager that is getting there and upgrades from one version to newer versions have been relatively painless for me. These upgrades are not the 'wipe system out and install latest version of distro' type. You will have to learn stuff unique to Solaris land though if you are not already familiar with some of the ways things are done in Solaris.
Mag Gam wrote:> I am planning to use ZFS on my Centos 5.2 systems. The data I am > storing is very large text files where each file can range from 10M to > 20G. I am very interested on the compression feature of ZFS, and it > seems no other native Linux FS supports it. > > My question are: Is ZFS stable? How does it scale for very large > filesytems, ie, 2TB to 9TB? How is the performance of fuse? I plan to > use it on my archive server first, so data reliability is very > important > > Any thoughts or ideas? >Did you look at Ext4 ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4 "The ext4 filesystem can support volumes with sizes up to 1 exbibyte and files with sizes up to 16 TiB" At least for linux it looks better that ZFS via fuse. -- Best Wishes, PAIX-UANIC | SK3929-RIPE