Complete Noob

Maturin said:
Not only coming from Linux.

UFS is a fully sufficient, fast, reliable, sophisticated, pleasing, while at the same time easy to setup, easy to use, and easy to maintain filesystem. I run it on both my laptop drives, and I would never think of running ZFS on a RaspPi sd-card.

Besides I don't really get it, why some people use ZFS on single partition pools - snapshots, I know. But besides I doubt that justifys all the downsides you get with ZFS, which produces all its benefits on raid configs, and AFAIK UFS is also capable of doing snapshots, there are other ways, and backups have to be done anyway - I always recommend people to start on FreeBSD with UFS.
Click to expand...

ZFS does provide better data recovery. A minimum of three copies of metadata are written to disk. Each block is checksummed with a hash. You will almost always know when your data is corrupt with ZFS. UFS and old-school filesystems like it don't do this.

UFS has recently (over the last five years) obtained the facility to checksum its metadata. But UFS offered by the other BSDs, Solaris and other legacy systems don't do this.

Maturin said:
Plus under some circumstances UFS is even faster than ZFS.

ZFS simply needs some learning. Of course, it's a great FS. No question. I use it myself on several machines and pools for many years. But it's for sure no beginners FS. One simply needs some experience in FreeBSD itself, before you start on ZFS. Trying to start new on both FreeBSD and ZFS at the same time is almost guaranteed to fail.
Click to expand...

ZFS is a different paradigm. It's volume manager and filesystem wrapped up in one.

Maturin said:
While there is absolutely nothing wrong with UFS.
I don't get it.
I believe many people don't think much ahead, underestimate needed learning effort while overestimating their expertise.
Click to expand...

That's like anything. Read this book.
 
cy@ said:
UFS and old-school filesystems like it
Click to expand...
An old-school filesystem for an old-school operating system: UNIX. I like to keep things simple on my home computer, so I choose UFS. I understand why others prefer, or even need ZFS. Neither can be considered superior to the other; it's a matter of preferences or requirements. :)
 
Useradd said:
An old-school filesystem for an old-school operating system: UNIX. I like to keep things simple on my home computer, so I choose UFS. I understand why others prefer, or even need ZFS. Neither can be considered superior to the other; it's a matter of preferences or requirements. :)
Click to expand...
Yeah.

All my systems here at home use both. They boot off UFS while ZFS is for data. The reason: I clone them rather than install them from scratch. For example, when I cloned my old laptop to my new laptop I simply had to change a few settings in rc.conf and some device names in fstab. Then for data I did a zpool attach to create a mirror to a partition on the new disk and zpool split to detach the mirror as its own pool. Finally remove the disk (ssd) from the enclosure and put it into the new machine. Boot, make some final adjustments and all may settings, ports, packages, and data are as they were on the old laptop. A job that might have taken days to set up installing ports and packages and copying data took a few hours during an evening. Most of which was done while I made dinner and cleaned up the kitchen.

I've done this for all my systems since my first FreeBSD (2.0.5). I also did this professionally when I worked on Solaris and Tru64 UNIX. I've yet to duplicate this on Linux because of LVM. The last time I did try it Linux, clone a Fedora system while converting rootfs from XFS to EXT4, resulted in the complete loss of all data. There is something to be said about the simplicity of booting off UFS while using ZFS for data.

I suppose a person could do something similar with a ZFS-only system.

UEFI does complicate things as the EFI partition also needs to be copied. Not specifically copied per se but when cloning from a traditional BIOS system to a UEFI system one must create the EFI partition by hand. Then play around with the UEFI BIOS to find the boot file. Certainly doable, done it twice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top