Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Running ZFS Natively On Linux Slower Than Btrfs

Posted by kdawson on from the early-days dept.

An anonymous reader writes "It's been known that ZFS is coming to Linux in the form of a native kernel module done by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and KQ Infotech. The ZFS module is still in closed testing on KQ infotech's side (but LLNL's ZFS code is publicly available), and now Phoronix has tried out the ZFS file-system on Linux and carried out some tests. ZFS on Linux via this native module is much faster than using ZFS-FUSE, but the Solaris file-system in most areas is not nearly as fast as EXT4, Btrfs, or XFS."

8 of 235 comments (clear)

  1. First post! by halfaperson · · Score: 5, Funny

    Using BTRFS :)

    --
    Jesus had a UNIX beard.
  2. Re:That's not a solaris filesystem by datapharmer · · Score: 3, Funny

    You can save your stuff in /dev/null quite fast too!

    I know! It is friggin crazy fast. I've been using it for backups for years. Even with terrabytes of data I've never managed to fill it up or slow it down!

    --
    Get a web developer
  3. Btrfs naming convention by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Funny

    Couldn't they name the file system something better than butterface?

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Btrfs naming convention by timeOday · · Score: 2, Funny

      What are you complaining about? I always thought it was "bitter farts."

    2. Re:Btrfs naming convention by Abstrackt · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unfortunately Gimp was already taken.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
  4. Re:They Why ZFS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can write the fastest file system around, assuming you don't put much weight on the whole 'being able to read the data back' thingie.

    You mean "> /dev/null"?

  5. Re:They Why ZFS? by guruevi · · Score: 2, Funny

    Try a RAID-10 array of /dev/null's - it's even faster.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  6. Re:They Why ZFS? by ebuck · · Score: 2, Funny

    A homage to Spinal tap:

    Nigel Tufnel: My RAID array are all RAID-11. Look, right across the rack, RAID-11, RAID-11, RAID-11and...
    Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most arrays go up to RAID-10?
    Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
    Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's faster? Is it any faster?
    Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one faster, isn't it? It's not RAID-10. You see, most blokes, you know, will be serving files at RAID-10. You're on RAID-10 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on RAID-10 on your database backup. Where can you go from there? Where?
    Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
    Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
    Marty DiBergi: Put it up to RAID-11.
    Nigel Tufnel: RAID-11. Exactly. One faster.
    Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make RAID-10 faster and make RAID-10 be the top performer and make that a little faster?
    Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to RAID-11.