else or Debian (Re: ZFS performance (was: Re: deduplicating file systems: VDO with Debian?))
On Wed, 2022-11-09 at 14:29 +0100, didier gaumet wrote:
> Le 09/11/2022 à 12:41, hw a écrit :
> [...]
> > In any case, I'm currently tending to think that putting FreeBSD with ZFS on
> > my
> > server might be the best option. But then, apparently I won't be able to
> > configure the controller cards, so that won't really work. And ZFS with
> > Linux
> > isn't so great because it keeps fuse in between.
>
> I am really not so well aware of ZFS state but my impression was that:
> - FUSE implementation of ZoL (ZFS on Linux) is deprecated and that,
> Ubuntu excepted (classic module?), ZFS is now integrated by a DKMS module
Hm that could be. Debian doesn't seem to have it as a module.
> - *BSDs integrate directly ZFS because there are no licences conflicts
> - *BSDs nowadays have departed from old ZFS code and use the same source
> code stack as Linux (OpenZFS)
> - Linux distros don't directly integrate ZFS because they generally
> consider there are licences conflicts. The notable exception being
> Ubuntu that considers that after legal review the situation is clear and
> there is no licence conflicts.
Well, I'm not touching Ubuntu. I want to get away from Fedora because of their
hostility and that includes Centos since that has become a derivative of it.
FreeBSD has ZFS but can't even configure the disk controllers, so that won't
work. I don't want to go with Gentoo because updating is a nightmare to the
point where you suddenly find yourself unable to update at all because they
broke something. Arch is apparently for machosists, and I don't want
derivatives, especially not Ubuntu, and that leaves only Debian. I don't want
Debian either because when they introduced their brokenarch, they managed to
make it so that NVIDIA drivers didn't work anymore with no fix in sight and
broke other stuff as well, and you can't let your users down like that. But
what's the alternative?
However, Debian has apparently bad ZFS support (apparently still only Gentoo
actually supports it), so I'd go with btrfs. Now that's gona suck because I'd
have to use mdadm to create a RAID5 (or use the hardware RAID but that isn't fun
after I've seen the hardware RAID refusing to rebuild a volume after a failed
disk was replaced) and put btrfs on that because btrfs doesn't even support
RAID5.
Or what else?
Reply to: