Status of ZFS in -stable?

[Marcin Cieslak]

Hugo Silva wrote:
> Daniel Gerzo wrote:
>> Hello Pierre-Luc,
>>
>> Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 6:26:49 AM, you wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Hi,
>>>     
>>
>>  
>>> I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has been
>>> fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable" now?


I am using ZFS on my laptop as a typical, heavily used desktop system. I 
experience some concurrency issues (the machine "locks up" for a moment 
while the system is doing some work). I am doing some heavy tasks like 
compiling OpenOffice in my free time.

I experience very strange behaviour when running out of space (one of 
the applications dumped a huge core file that could not be rm(1)'ed 
because of.... "Not enough space"!).

In my personal opinion, the stability of FreeBSD 7.0-stable with ZFS 
(and maybe other features are at fault, e.g. wpi driver, my ACPI) is not 
very good. I experience strange hangs and hick-ups, sometimes panics.
The good thing about ZFS is that no matter how hard it dies it usually 
comes up good (once I had to wait a while to let it recover after reboot 
and reboot the system again cleanly since some files were missing and 
just re-appeared later).

I am bound to use ZFS because it saves me a lot of space (no need for 
partition split), but as soon as I setup some more external disk space 
for my laptop I may consider not using it anymore.

--Marcin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 273 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20080513/757c63d7/signature-0001.pgp