How much of a difference is there in supporting applications in between Ubuntu and OpenSolaris? I was not considering Ubuntu until OpenSOlaris would not load onto my machine... Any info would be great. I have not been able to find any sort of comparison of ZFS on Ubuntu and OS. Thanks. (My current OS install troubleshoot thread - http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=488193񷌁) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Ben Miles <merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote:> How much of a difference is there in supporting applications in between Ubuntu and OpenSolaris? > I was not considering Ubuntu until OpenSOlaris would not load onto my machine... > > Any info would be great. I have not been able to find any sort of comparison of ZFS on Ubuntu and OS. > > Thanks. > > (My current OS install troubleshoot thread - http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=488193񷌁)If you want ZFS, then go with FreeBSD instead of Ubuntu. FreeBSD 8.1 includes ZFSv14 with patches available for ZFSv15 and ZFSv16. You''ll get a more stable, better performant system than trying to shoehorn ZFS-FUSE into Ubuntu (we''ve tried with Debian, and ZFS-FUSE is good for short-term testing, but not production use). -- Freddie Cash fjwcash at gmail.com
On 6/25/2010 6:49 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Ben Miles<merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> How much of a difference is there in supporting applications in between Ubuntu and OpenSolaris? >> I was not considering Ubuntu until OpenSOlaris would not load onto my machine... >> >> Any info would be great. I have not been able to find any sort of comparison of ZFS on Ubuntu and OS. >> >> Thanks. >> >> (My current OS install troubleshoot thread - http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=488193񷌁) >> > If you want ZFS, then go with FreeBSD instead of Ubuntu. FreeBSD 8.1 > includes ZFSv14 with patches available for ZFSv15 and ZFSv16. You''ll > get a more stable, better performant system than trying to shoehorn > ZFS-FUSE into Ubuntu (we''ve tried with Debian, and ZFS-FUSE is good > for short-term testing, but not production use). >See a previous thread on this list (i.e. look in the archives for May/June) for a still-in-progress port of kernel-level ZFS to Linux. It''s not ready yet, but they promise Real Soon Now! That said, if you need ZFS right now, it''s either FreeBSD or OpenSolaris (or Solaris 10). Two other considerations from your original message: (1) What do you mean by "supporting applications"? Do you mean are the same applications available on Linux and OpenSolaris? Or do you mean that you are writing an application (or have application source) that was targeted for OpenSolaris/Solaris, and would like to now port it to Linux? (2) Ubuntu is a desktop distribution. Don''t be fooled by their "server" version. It''s not - it has too many idiosyncrasies and bad design choices to be a stable server OS. Use something like Debian, SLES, or RHEL/CentOS. (also - have you tried installing the original 2009.06 "stable" OpenSolaris version? It might not have the install issues you''re running into with the Dev branch, and give you something to do while you wait for the next 2010.X stable version of OpenSolaris...) -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Erik Trimble <erik.trimble at oracle.com> wrote:> (2) Ubuntu is a desktop distribution. Don''t be fooled by their "server" > version. It''s not - it has too many idiosyncrasies and bad design choices to > be a stable server OS. ?Use something like Debian, SLES, or RHEL/CentOS.Why would you say that? What "idiosyncrasies and bad design choices" are you talking about? Just curious.
What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles <merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote:> What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ?None. Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE project. But it''s not stable, nor recommended. -- Freddie Cash fjwcash at gmail.com
> From: zfs-discuss-bounces at opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > bounces at opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Ben Miles > > What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ?I see, "supporting applications" is just confusing English, because your filesystem isn''t an application. I think you''re just asking "How can I do raid on ubuntu." This question might be more appropriate on an ubuntu list instead. But here''s a quick answer anyway: You can do zfs-fuse. It''s not as good as having ZFS included natively with your OS. Aside from that, there is no raidz available in ubuntu, or any linux. (Well, at least theoretically you could use the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory linux port of ZFS, http://wiki.github.com/behlendorf/zfs/, which will allow you to create raidz zpool''s and then you can format the zvol with ext3/ext4). But this is lacking a lot of functionality of zfs, and extremely new. If you don''t need "raidz" for example, if raid5 is ok ... man pvcreate, man vgcreate, man lvcreate. It''s not as good as zfs or raidz, but it does support software raid5. But why would you want to do software raid5 on anything that doesn''t have zfs? If you''re not using zfs, you should get a hardware raid controller with writeback cache and BBU.
----- Original Message -----> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles <merlock18 at hotmail.com> > wrote: > > What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ? > > None. Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. > > You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE project. But it''s not > stable, nor recommended.FYI, zfs-fuse is in 10.04 by default Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et element?rt imperativ for alle pedagoger ? unng? eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer p? norsk.
I tried to post this question on the Ubuntu forum. Within 30 minutes my post was on the second page of new posts... Yah. Im really not down with using Ubuntu on my server here. But I may be forced to. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
----- Original Message -----> I tried to post this question on the Ubuntu forum. > Within 30 minutes my post was on the second page of new posts... > > Yah. Im really not down with using Ubuntu on my server here. But I may > be forced to.As others have suggested, perhaps you should try FreeBSD? Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et element?rt imperativ for alle pedagoger ? unng? eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer p? norsk.
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:> ----- Original Message ----- >> I tried to post this question on the Ubuntu forum. >> Within 30 minutes my post was on the second page of new posts... >> >> Yah. Im really not down with using Ubuntu on my server here. But I may >> be forced to. > > As others have suggested, perhaps you should try FreeBSD?As long as the hardware supports 64-bits, I definitely second that suggestion. FreeBSD is often severely underestimated by those who have never used it. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfriesen at simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Of course, nexenta os is a build of ubuntu on an opensolaris kernel. On Jun 26, 2010, at 12:27 AM, Freddie Cash <fjwcash at gmail.com> wrote:> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles <merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: >> What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ? > > None. Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. > > You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE project. But it''s not > stable, nor recommended. > > -- > Freddie Cash > fjwcash at gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware limitations as OpenSolaris. -Erik On 6/27/2010 5:56 PM, Joe Little wrote:> Of course, nexenta os is a build of ubuntu on an opensolaris kernel. > > > > On Jun 26, 2010, at 12:27 AM, Freddie Cash<fjwcash at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles<merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ? >>> >> None. Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. >> >> You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE project. But it''s not >> stable, nor recommended. >> >> -- >> Freddie Cash >> fjwcash at gmail.com >> _______________________________________________ >> zfs-discuss mailing list >> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >> > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >-- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
On Jun 27, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:> But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware limitations as OpenSolaris.AFAICT, the OP''s problem is with a keyboard. The vagaries of keyboards is well documented, but there is no silver bullet. Indeed, I have one box that seems to be more or less happy with PS-2 vs USB for every other OS or hypervisor. My advice, have one of each handy, just in case. -- richard> > -Erik > > > On 6/27/2010 5:56 PM, Joe Little wrote: >> Of course, nexenta os is a build of ubuntu on an opensolaris kernel. >> >> >> >> On Jun 26, 2010, at 12:27 AM, Freddie Cash<fjwcash at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles<merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu for RAIDZ? >>>> >>> None. Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. >>> >>> You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE project. But it''s not >>> stable, nor recommended. >>> >>> -- >>> Freddie Cash >>> fjwcash at gmail.com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> zfs-discuss mailing list >>> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> zfs-discuss mailing list >> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >> > > > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: usca22-123 > Phone: x17195 > Santa Clara, CA > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss-- Richard Elling richard at nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/
On 6/27/2010 9:07 PM, Richard Elling wrote:> On Jun 27, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: > > >> But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware limitations as OpenSolaris. >> > AFAICT, the OP''s problem is with a keyboard. The vagaries of keyboards > is well documented, but there is no silver bullet. Indeed, I have one box that > seems to be more or less happy with PS-2 vs USB for every other OS or > hypervisor. My advice, have one of each handy, just in case. > -- richard > >Right. I was just pointing out the fallacy of thinking that Nexenta might work on hardware that OpenSolaris doesn''t (or has problems with). -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 21:07 -0700, Richard Elling wrote:> > > But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris > doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware > limitations as OpenSolaris. > > AFAICT, the OP''s problem is with a keyboard. The vagaries of > keyboards > is well documented, but there is no silver bullet. Indeed, I have one > box that > seems to be more or less happy with PS-2 vs USB for every other OS or > hypervisor. My advice, have one of each handy, just in case. > -- richardOk, I happen to know a few things about USB and PS/2 keyboards. I don''t recall the OP problem report. Can someone recap for me? Perhaps I can help root cause the actual problem that would affect both OpenSolaris and Nexenta? - Garrett
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 21:54 -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:> On 6/27/2010 9:07 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > > On Jun 27, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: > > > > > >> But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware limitations as OpenSolaris. > >> > > AFAICT, the OP''s problem is with a keyboard. The vagaries of keyboards > > is well documented, but there is no silver bullet. Indeed, I have one box that > > seems to be more or less happy with PS-2 vs USB for every other OS or > > hypervisor. My advice, have one of each handy, just in case. > > -- richard > > > > > > Right. I was just pointing out the fallacy of thinking that Nexenta > might work on hardware that OpenSolaris doesn''t (or has problems with).Actually, the kernel in Nexenta is not truly identical, and generally leads official OpenSolaris releases. (We''re using a 134 kernel at present, plus a bunch of individual fixes and some of our own additions.) So while you might think that if something doesn''t work in OpenSolaris it won''t work in Nexenta, you might be surprised. (Then again, you might not!) Trying certainly wouldn''t hurt. - Garrett
All true, I just saw too many "need ubuntu and zfs" and thought to state the obvious in case the patch set for nexenta happen to differ enough to provide a working set. I''ve had nexenta succeed where opensolaris quarter releases failed and vice versa On Jun 27, 2010, at 9:54 PM, Erik Trimble <erik.trimble at oracle.com> wrote:> On 6/27/2010 9:07 PM, Richard Elling wrote: >> On Jun 27, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: >> >> >>> But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware limitations as OpenSolaris. >>> >> AFAICT, the OP''s problem is with a keyboard. The vagaries of keyboards >> is well documented, but there is no silver bullet. Indeed, I have one box that >> seems to be more or less happy with PS-2 vs USB for every other OS or >> hypervisor. My advice, have one of each handy, just in case. >> -- richard >> >> > > Right. I was just pointing out the fallacy of thinking that Nexenta might work on hardware that OpenSolaris doesn''t (or has problems with). > > > > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: usca22-123 > Phone: x17195 > Santa Clara, CA >
I think zfs on ubuntu currently is a rather bad idea. See test below with ubuntu Lucid 10.04 (amd64) root at bigone:~# cat /proc/partitions major minor #blocks name 8 0 312571224 sda 8 1 979933 sda1 8 2 3911827 sda2 8 3 48829567 sda3 8 4 1 sda4 8 5 49287388 sda5 8 6 49287388 sda6 8 7 49287388 sda7 8 8 49287388 sda8 8 9 49287388 sda9 8 10 12410181 sda10 root at bigone:~# zpool create zowhat raidz2 sda5 sda6 sda7 sda8 sda9 cannot open ''zowhat'': dataset does not exist root at bigone:~# zpool status pool: zowhat state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM zowhat ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 sda5 ONLINE 0 0 0 sda6 ONLINE 0 0 0 sda7 ONLINE 0 0 0 sda8 ONLINE 0 0 0 sda9 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors root at bigone:~# zpool list NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT - - - - - - - root at bigone:~# zfs list no datasets available root at bigone:~# ----- Original Message -----> All true, I just saw too many "need ubuntu and zfs" and thought to > state the obvious in case the patch set for nexenta happen to differ > enough to provide a working set. I''ve had nexenta succeed where > opensolaris quarter releases failed and vice versa > > On Jun 27, 2010, at 9:54 PM, Erik Trimble <erik.trimble at oracle.com> > wrote: > > > On 6/27/2010 9:07 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > >> On Jun 27, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: > >> > >> > >>> But that won''t solve the OP''s problem, which was that OpenSolaris > >>> doesn''t support his hardware. Nexenta has the same hardware > >>> limitations as OpenSolaris. > >>> > >> AFAICT, the OP''s problem is with a keyboard. The vagaries of > >> keyboards > >> is well documented, but there is no silver bullet. Indeed, I have > >> one box that > >> seems to be more or less happy with PS-2 vs USB for every other OS > >> or > >> hypervisor. My advice, have one of each handy, just in case. > >> -- richard > >> > >> > > > > Right. I was just pointing out the fallacy of thinking that Nexenta > > might work on hardware that OpenSolaris doesn''t (or has problems > > with). > > > > > > > > -- > > Erik Trimble > > Java System Support > > Mailstop: usca22-123 > > Phone: x17195 > > Santa Clara, CA > > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss-- Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et element?rt imperativ for alle pedagoger ? unng? eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer p? norsk.
----- Original Message -----> I think zfs on ubuntu currently is a rather bad idea. See test below > with ubuntu Lucid 10.04 (amd64)Quick update on this - it seems this is due to a bug in the Linux kernel where it can''t deal with partition changes on a drive with mounted filesystems. I''m not 100% sure about this, but it still looks that way. Testing with disks with non-mounted filesystems shows this works better. Just my two cents Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et element?rt imperativ for alle pedagoger ? unng? eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer p? norsk.
Rodrigo E. De Le?n Plicet wrote:> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Erik Trimble <erik.trimble at oracle.com> wrote: > >> (2) Ubuntu is a desktop distribution. Don''t be fooled by their "server" >> version. It''s not - it has too many idiosyncrasies and bad design choices to >> be a stable server OS. Use something like Debian, SLES, or RHEL/CentOS. >> > > Why would you say that? > > What "idiosyncrasies and bad design choices" are you talking about? > > Just curiousI asked Erik about this. Here is the consolidated discussion: E>>>>>> (2) Ubuntu is a desktop distribution. Don''t be fooled by their E>>>>>> "server" version. It''s not - it has too many idiosyncrasies and bad E>>>>>> design choices to be a stable server OS. Use something like Debian, E>>>>>> SLES, or RHEL/CentOS. H>>>>> Can you explain some of or link me to the bad design choices or H>>>>> idiosyncrasies that make Ubuntu not stable as a server OS? H>>>>> H>>>>> I''m only refering to the Ubuntu Server LTS releases (5 year long term H>>>>> support) which to date have included 6.06, 8.04, and 10.04. The LTS H>>>>> releases are held to a higher standard (more showcase) than their other H>>>>> releases (testing). Ubuntu uses non-LTS releases to encourage rapid H>>>>> project development (e.g. adding GRUB2 in 9.10). I won''t argue about H>>>>> the non-LTS releases. E>>>> Specifically, even on the LTS releases, the "server" version actually E>>>> uses the same packages as the "desktop" version, which leads to problems E>>>> with assumed defaults. Classic case is iptables, where many of the E>>>> management packages that go with it use desktop-oriented defaults rather E>>>> than server-oriented defaults. So, when you upgrade (or, even just E>>>> update), it tends to break things. H>>> I''ve seen stuff break on upgrades as well, although updates have been fine H>>> for me. This breakage is why I delay upgrades on shared machines that H>>> impact others (e.g. on HTPCs with MythTV on Ubuntu) until I know I can do H>>> a clean slate rebuild if the upgrade doesn''t go right, and often do the H>>> clean slate rebuild anyway. I treat an Ubuntu upgrade similar to a H>>> Windows upgrade (e.g. WinXP to Win7). E>>>> I''ve also seen issues with obsoleting/removing packages (or, more E>>>> likely, specific items from packages) without notification. I lost the E>>>> libstdc++5 library after 8.04 (it''s not even in the 10.04 LTS), and E>>>> there was no mention of it being deleted, not even buried in release E>>>> notes. H>>> Features lost to claims of ''UI design improvement and simplification'' are H>>> right up there on the annoyance list. Removed features often end up in H>>> big discussion threads on http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/ . This moving H>>> target characteristic certainly makes it harder to get programs working H>>> that aren''t already in the repositories. At least an LTS release has a H>>> safe 3 year usage window (as all LTS packages are maintained for 3 years, H>>> and server packages are maintained for 5 years). E>>>> Ubuntu doesn''t seem to really care about long-term stability. I''m not E>>>> talking about the kernel ABI (which, is really out of their hands). I''m E>>>> talking about being very careful about not breaking userland and E>>>> admin-land stuff without advanced notice, and significant failure to E>>>> support a transition period. Stuff just goes away and/or breaks at a E>>>> whim between releases. H>>> Ubuntu''s long term stability (i.e. software compatibility) appears H>>> intended to stay within a single LTS version, which I feel is really H>>> only ''for sure'' for 3 years. That is on the short end of the range of H>>> even popular general desktop OSes (WinXP is an outlier). H>>> H>>> In spite of its shortcoming, the primary advantages Ubuntu maintains are H>>> 1.) wider, earlier hardware support H>>> 2.) rapid iteration: a regular release cycle that gets software into H>>> testing and use, in preparation for the next release cycle for that H>>> software and Ubuntu as a whole H>>> H>>> I think Ubuntu LTS still makes sense for machines (even servers) that H>>> don''t need long-term stability (i.e. software compatibility) and can H>>> benefit from the earlier hardware support it offers. It''s not an OS to H>>> install and leave alone (only patching) for extended time periods. E>> All of which is fine if you''re running a home server, or maybe designing E>> a black-box device. None of which is acceptable for general-purpose, E>> server-room machines. H> It is fine for virtual servers intended to run small/ephemeral H> websites that you don''t mind migrating again in the near term. Not so H> good for an important piece of backbone infrastructure that simply H> needs to run without periodic tuning. E>> Product cycles there are 8-10 years, and there E>> has to be significant upgradability (i.e. I should be able to expect to E>> upgrade my OS and not break anything for a span of about 20 years, E>> covering probably 3 major releases). Solaris, AIX, and HPUX can all do E>> this, as can RedHat and SuSE/Novell. Ubuntu''s just not server-room E>> ready, and won''t be until they decide to change the development goals E>> for the "server" product version. Which, I think, is unlikely H> In that respect Microsoft did pretty well with Windows and backwards H> compatibility. A fair number of Win 3.1 apps (~1992) still work fine H> on 32bit WinXP (2001-present), although sometimes DLLs/libraries must H> be tracked down. I find the expectation of little breakage over 20 H> years a bit much. Sure, between two adjacent significant releases can H> be expected, but beyond that is going to require a specific commitment H> from the OS vendor or an installed entrenched user base. Ubuntu does H> not offer this type of commitment and does not have the user base that H> needs it. H> H> Solaris: 7 years for patches, 10 years total per H> http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml H> AIX: 5-7 total years per H> http://www-01.ibm.com/software/support/lifecycle/index_a_z.html H> Novell/SUSE: 7 years for patches, 10 years total per H> http://support.novell.com/lifecycle/ Yup, but that''s *per release*. Solaris (for instance) has binary compatibility and library compatibility all the way back to Solaris 2.0 in 1991. AIX and HPUX are similar. *very* few things ever break between releases on professional UNIX systems. Those that do, have had a considerable amount of pre-notice (usually at least 1 full release of deprecation before the feature is removed). 20 years isn''t much to ask. RedHat and SLES both do over 10 years back at this point, through 3 releases each. H> H> May I share your clarification/our conversation with the list? Sure. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100719/8b082bf4/attachment.html>
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles > <merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: > > What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu > for RAIDZ? > > None. Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. > > You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE > project. But it''s not > stable, nor recommended.I have been using zfs-fuse on my home server for a long time now and its rock solid. Its as stable and usable as opensolaris build 143 I am using on opensolaris. Yeah, write performance sucks but I do not care about seq write performance that much. There may be some inertial Linuxy/Fusy quirks around it as well but most have been ironed out in 0.6.9. I have successfully exported and imported pools from/to Opensolaris/Linux managed pools. No issues at all. Just curious: have you tried 0.6.9 release of zfs-fuse? You should join the google group of zfs-fuse and someone can help u along. (I can''t say the same about BTRFS though. BTRFS was flaky in my experience on my laptop. It bit me twice with missing and corrupt files. Have move back to ext4. But that''s OT.) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 9:40 PM, devsk <funtoos at yahoo.com> wrote:>> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles >> <merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: >> > What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu >> for RAIDZ? >> >> None. ?Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. >> >> You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE >> project. ?But it''s not >> stable, nor recommended. > > I have been using zfs-fuse on my home server for a long time now and its rock solid. Its as stable and usable as opensolaris build 143 I am using on opensolaris. Yeah, write performance sucks but I do not care about seq write performance that much. There may be some inertial Linuxy/Fusy quirks around it as well but most have been ironed out in 0.6.9. > > I have successfully exported and imported pools from/to Opensolaris/Linux managed pools. No issues at all. > > Just curious: have you tried 0.6.9 release of zfs-fuse? You should join the google group of zfs-fuse and someone can help u along.(You need to fix your quoting as I''m not listed, and I''m the one who made the remarks about zfs-fuse instability.) zfs-fuse 0.6.0 compiled from source, running on 64-bit Debian 5.0, using Linux kernel 2.6.26, using ZFS v22. We were testing dedupe to see how it would affect our data storage once it hits FreeBSD. We could not keep the test server up and running for more than 3-4 days at a time. 8 GB of RAM, 12 500 GB SATA harddrives, 2x dual-core AMD CPUs. All the same hardware as our FreeBSD storage servers. Running a single rsync stream from FreeBSD to Linux would wedge the box. Pulling a drive to see how the failure modes work would wedge the box. Booting without a drive would wedge the box. Basically, anything except slow writes would cause errors in ZFS and wedge the box. Definitely not a hardware problem as this box was used previously as a VM host, and everything runs fine when zfs-fuse is disabled. We gave up on it after a couple of weeks. Sure, the dedupe numbers looked great (we can''t wait for FreeBSD to get ZFSv20+). But the zfs-fuse system was just too unstable to be usable for even simple testing. -- Freddie Cash fjwcash at gmail.com
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Haudy Kazemi wrote:> > Yup, but that''s *per release*.? Solaris (for instance) has binary > compatibility and library compatibility all the way back to Solaris 2.0 > in 1991. AIX and HPUX are similar.? *very* few things ever break between > releases on professional UNIX systems.? Those that do, have had aI am still using applications built under Solaris 2.1 in 1993. :-) Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfriesen at simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
> That said, if you need ZFS right now, it''s either > FreeBSD or OpenSolarisOr Debian GNU/kFreeBSD ;-) http://tucobsd.blogspot.com/2010/08/apt-get-install-zfsutils.html -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
Or Nexenta :) http://www.nexenta.org ~Anil On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Tuco <tuco.xyz at gmail.com> wrote:>> That said, if you need ZFS right now, it''s either >> FreeBSD or OpenSolaris > > Or Debian GNU/kFreeBSD ;-) > > http://tucobsd.blogspot.com/2010/08/apt-get-install-zfsutils.html > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 9:40 PM, devsk > <funtoos at yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Ben Miles > >> <merlock18 at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > What supporting applications are there on Ubuntu > >> for RAIDZ? > >> > >> None. ?Ubuntu doesn''t officially support ZFS. > >> > >> You can kind of make it work using the ZFS-FUSE > >> project. ?But it''s not > >> stable, nor recommended. > > > > I have been using zfs-fuse on my home server for a > long time now and its rock solid. Its as stable and > usable as opensolaris build 143 I am using on > opensolaris. Yeah, write performance sucks but I do > not care about seq write performance that much. There > may be some inertial Linuxy/Fusy quirks around it as > well but most have been ironed out in 0.6.9. > > > > I have successfully exported and imported pools > from/to Opensolaris/Linux managed pools. No issues at > all. > > > > Just curious: have you tried 0.6.9 release of > zfs-fuse? You should join the google group of > zfs-fuse and someone can help u along. > > (You need to fix your quoting as I''m not listed, and > I''m the one who > made the remarks about zfs-fuse instability.) > > zfs-fuse 0.6.0 compiled from source, running on > 64-bit Debian 5.0, > using Linux kernel 2.6.26, using ZFS v22. > > We were testing dedupe to see how it would affect our > data storage > once it hits FreeBSD. We could not keep the test > server up and > running for more than 3-4 days at a time. > > 8 GB of RAM, 12 500 GB SATA harddrives, 2x dual-core > AMD CPUs. All > the same hardware as our FreeBSD storage servers. > > Running a single rsync stream from FreeBSD to Linux > would wedge the > box. Pulling a drive to see how the failure modes > work would wedge > the box. Booting without a drive would wedge the > box. Basically, > anything except slow writes would cause errors in ZFS > and wedge the > box. Definitely not a hardware problem as this box > was used > previously as a VM host, and everything runs fine > when zfs-fuse is > disabled. > > We gave up on it after a couple of weeks. Sure, the > dedupe numbers > looked great (we can''t wait for FreeBSD to get > ZFSv20+). But the > zfs-fuse system was just too unstable to be usable > for even simple > testing.I did not get this email for some reason, Freddie. So, I am seeing it just now. zfs-fuse-0.6.9 is a different beast compared to 0.6.0. There are tonnes of fixes in zfs-fuse code and in zfs which are now part of 0.6.9. I think it may be worthwhile to invest a day and do the experiment again with 0.6.9. I have been very happy with dedup on my backup (which stores data from all my machines, and hence has lot of duplication). Dedup and compression combined saves me about 35% on my box (It is a i7 920 with 12GB RAM). In OS, I think there is a SMF tie up to handle the device removal/addition. The same is handled through a script in 0.6.9. A decent script which can handle hot spares comes with the install. You can of course change it to do whatever you want. -devsk -- This message posted from opensolaris.org