The Good & Bad Of ZFS + HAMMER File-Systems On BSD

[phoronix]

Phoronix: The Good & Bad Of ZFS + HAMMER File-Systems On BSD

ZFS is commonly viewed as the next-generation, high-end file-system for BSD systems while DragonFlyBSD defaults to their own HAMMER file-system designed by Matthew Dillon. For those wondering though how ZFS compares to HAMMER, here's a comparison...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTg3Nzk

[jake_lesser]

They both suck and are in no way represent the future of file systems. Want to see the future of file systems? Look at btrfs and ext4 (especially btrfs).

By the way, it's meaningless to just compare ZFS and HammerFS as they have the same shit design, same shitty design team mentality and aptitude and are almost as worse as each other (HammerFS being slightly worse). To make sense, we must include ZFS, EXT4FS and Resier4. ZFS feature's aren't Sun's invention. They were copied from Hans Resier's design together with some tweets and a whole lot of flaws due to the bureaucracy at Sun. HammerFS is nothing but a BTRFS/ZFS wannabe, unfortunately mad dog Dillion didn't have to skill or resources to candy coat shit. BTRFS takes all the good parts from ZFS and implements them correctly together with lots of innovative features from oracle.

[pdffs]

Link is broken, should be: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/zfs-vs-hammer.49789/

[TeamBlackFox]

They both suck and are in no way represent the future of file systems. Want to see the future of file systems? Look at btrfs and ext4 (especially btrfs).

By the way, it's meaningless to just compare ZFS and HammerFS as they have the same shit design, same shitty design team mentality and aptitude and are almost as worse as each other (HammerFS being slightly worse). To make sense, we must include ZFS, EXT4FS and Resier4. ZFS feature's aren't Sun's invention. They were copied from Hans Resier's design together with some tweets and a whole lot of flaws due to the bureaucracy at Sun. HammerFS is nothing but a BTRFS/ZFS wannabe, unfortunately mad dog Dillion didn't have to skill or resources to candy coat shit. BTRFS takes all the good parts from ZFS and implements them correctly together with lots of innovative features from oracle.

I wasn't going to say anything until you insulted Matt Dillon. I know him personally, via a colleague, and he is a wonderful man who has been programming since the 1990s, on an Amiga. He takes criticism well, is a lot more charismatic than Kay Sievers or Lennart Poettering or anyone at RedHat. The Linux kernel has been dominated by RedHat for the last 5 or so fucking years and every year it gets more and more terrible. KDBUS is ever on the horizon, and it threatens the Slackware, Gentoo and Void ecosystems. Systemd has encouraged distro division and cannibalism.

Anyways, jake_lesser, your posts are so unsubstantiated mass of opinions and anti-facts. Just circle-jerk over at the Arch forums, the systemd mailing list or aboutthebsds.wordpress.com. we don't need your kind here.

[Drago]

I wasn't going to say anything until you insulted Matt Dillon. I know him personally, via a colleague, and he is a wonderful man who has been programming since the 1990s, on an Amiga. He takes criticism well, is a lot more charismatic than Kay Sievers or Lennart Poettering or anyone at RedHat. The Linux kernel has been dominated by RedHat for the last 5 or so fucking years and every year it gets more and more terrible. KDBUS is ever on the horizon, and it threatens the Slackware, Gentoo and Void ecosystems. Systemd has encouraged distro division and cannibalism.

Anyways, jake_lesser, your posts are so unsubstantiated mass of opinions and anti-facts. Just circle-jerk over at the Arch forums, the systemd mailing list or aboutthebsds.wordpress.com. we don't need your kind here.

Don't make tragedy of Slackware, Gentoo, etc. Old distros will adapt or die, new distros will be born. That is called evolution and it usually naturally selects the most adjusted species for the current environment ( and not the old one ). Personally, I am happy with systemd, and I like the way it consolidates the sane distros.

[caligula]

I wasn't going to say anything until you insulted Matt Dillon. I know him personally, via a colleague, and he is a wonderful man who has been programming since the 1990s, on an Amiga. He takes criticism well, is a lot more charismatic than Kay Sievers or Lennart Poettering or anyone at RedHat. The Linux kernel has been dominated by RedHat for the last 5 or so fucking years and every year it gets more and more terrible. KDBUS is ever on the horizon, and it threatens the Slackware, Gentoo and Void ecosystems. Systemd has encouraged distro division and cannibalism.

Anyways, jake_lesser, your posts are so unsubstantiated mass of opinions and anti-facts. Just circle-jerk over at the Arch forums, the systemd mailing list or aboutthebsds.wordpress.com. we don't need your kind here.

Amen. On a more serious note, what's exactly wrong with ZFS? Some people just want to get shit done and ZFS just so happens to provide a stable and robust filesystem for them. That really can't be said about reiserfs 3/4 or btrfs. We use ZFS at work and my home NAS also uses FreeNAS/ZFS. Seems to be the best file system for the task ever. Maturity of tool, decent performance, robustness, reliability, easy to use. What's the problem?

[TeamBlackFox]

Caligula,

Nothing's wrong with ZFS if you're a BSD user. The Linux kernel however, will never merge with ZFS into mainline due to the CDDL its licenced under, which is similar to V1 of the MPL and considered GPL incompatible. I use FreeBSD as my main OS, alongside IRIX for legacy work. The main pull factors over to BSD include the more liberal licencing policy, better performance, the ports system, fine control over every aspect of the system and the more insular to the UNIX lineage. Soft updates on UFS are what I use on my laptop though, vs ZFS, primarily because ZFS, BTRFS and HAMMER have less advantages on single disk systems.

Drago,

The very reason I used to use Linux as a main OS was because the idea that everyone can do their own thing - different window manager, package management, init system, everyone can control almost every aspect of the OS in the fine way. First, HAL, then udev, then D-BUS, then systemd drove me away. Its a Microsoft software model. And no, its not like BSD because BSD has a MINIMAL base system. rc init may be 20+ years old, but it works. If you're all about advancement though, you'd not even use Linux, no, if we're about the latest and greatest, Plan 9 from Bell Labs or GNU Hurd would be the most applicable, or Haiku OS, or AROS. Seriously - until you control every aspect of the system, you cannot shoot down Slackware, Gentoo, Void or any of those. They're amazing, and systemd shouldn't coerce them into cannibalism.

[Drago]

Caligula,

Nothing's wrong with ZFS if you're a BSD user. The Linux kernel however, will never merge with ZFS into mainline due to the CDDL its licenced under, which is similar to V1 of the MPL and considered GPL incompatible. I use FreeBSD as my main OS, alongside IRIX for legacy work. The main pull factors over to BSD include the more liberal licencing policy, better performance, the ports system, fine control over every aspect of the system and the more insular to the UNIX lineage. Soft updates on UFS are what I use on my laptop though, vs ZFS, primarily because ZFS, BTRFS and HAMMER have less advantages on single disk systems.

Drago,

The very reason I used to use Linux as a main OS was because the idea that everyone can do their own thing - different window manager, package management, init system, everyone can control almost every aspect of the OS in the fine way. First, HAL, then udev, then D-BUS, then systemd drove me away. Its a Microsoft software model. And no, its not like BSD because BSD has a MINIMAL base system. rc init may be 20+ years old, but it works. If you're all about advancement though, you'd not even use Linux, no, if we're about the latest and greatest, Plan 9 from Bell Labs or GNU Hurd would be the most applicable, or Haiku OS, or AROS. Seriously - until you control every aspect of the system, you cannot shoot down Slackware, Gentoo, Void or any of those. They're amazing, and systemd shouldn't coerce them into cannibalism.

Can't you see. It is that fragmentation that prevents Linux to take the place of that walled garden desktop OSes - windows and osx. Knowledge of one distro is not easily transfered to other, and too much choice easily frightens people. Look at the phone market. If it wasn't Android as a single Linux distro, it wouldn't be ruling that market.

[brad0]

They both suck and are in no way represent the future of file systems. Want to see the future of file systems? Look at btrfs and ext4 (especially btrfs).

By the way, it's meaningless to just compare ZFS and HammerFS as they have the same shit design, same shitty design team mentality and aptitude and are almost as worse as each other (HammerFS being slightly worse). To make sense, we must include ZFS, EXT4FS and Resier4. ZFS feature's aren't Sun's invention. They were copied from Hans Resier's design together with some tweets and a whole lot of flaws due to the bureaucracy at Sun. HammerFS is nothing but a BTRFS/ZFS wannabe, unfortunately mad dog Dillion didn't have to skill or resources to candy coat shit. BTRFS takes all the good parts from ZFS and implements them correctly together with lots of innovative features from oracle.

A pretty poor job at a troll post.

[BradN]

Well, now that someone's brought up Gentoo, I figured I'd chime in with my thoughts there:

Gentoo and other (especially source based) "choose your own adventure" distros are valuable because they get people exposed to the OS internals in a wide ranging, general sense. People that use it feel all the design fuckups and oversights that happen, and while it's annoying to have to deal with those problems, it's valuable for the software ecosystem for them to be seen and dealt with.

That is, more people get a better sense for how much and what kind of stuff is going on behind the scenes, which is good experience for developers and distro integrators to have, and it causes a lot of integration level bugs to get fixed upstream because there are more users performing these tasks. It also serves as an easy to use testbed/platform for bleeding edge development.

I think if gentoo and distros like it suddenly weren't around, a lot of other distros would get measurably worse in short order.