On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 03:37:26PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
quoted text
> On 07/01/2008, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
> 
> > Your question is based on the premise that ZFS in FreeBSD 7 is unstable.
> > That premise is false.
> 
> At most, we'll have to agree to disagree. A "tuning" of the system (at
> least from my experience) is about system performance, not whether the
> system will crash or not. You may define the word to mean something
> else but that's your thing.
> 
> The reason I'm aggressively discussing this is that labeling the
> problem as "tuning" will, for any non-trivial task which has some
> growth in system load, result in a server that needs constant tuning
> just to survive another day. What is tuned today may as well result in
> a crash tomorrow if the load rises. Web servers are notorious for this
> (though other types have of course similar behaviour) - a
> "slashdotting" of a "properly tuned" FreeBSD system with ZFS will not
> result in a slowdown - it will result in the system crashing. This is
> not acceptable, and therefore dismissing it as "just tuning" is
> counterproductive and bad engineering.

ZFS is clearly marked as experimental so its reasonable to require tuning
to avoid crashes. If its still the case when the experimental status is
lifted then you can have this argument all over again.


cheers,
Andrew
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"