ZFS in Latest Leopard Builds

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Dec 18, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    Messages:
    7,175
    #1
    [​IMG]

    Several sites are reporting on ZFS support that is now built into the latest build of Mac OS X (Leopard) which was seeded last week.

    The ZFS team at Sun was contacted by Apple in April about porting ZFS to Mac OS X. Arstechnica previously discussed advantages of ZFS as a file system. These include

    - Efficient storage and handling of very small files.
    - Logical volume management through a pooled storage model.
    - Improved data integrity using checksums on all data.
    - Snapshots

    Mac4Ever first posted a screenshot of the ZFS formatting option now in Leopard:

    [​IMG]

    More information on ZFS is available at the ZFS homepage and Wikipedia.
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    failsafe1

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    622
    #2
    Could this mean revolutionary things ahead for the next OS? Perhaps better integration with new hardware?
     
  3. macrumors 65816

    m-dogg

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,339
    Location:
    Connecticut
    #3
    So will ZFS just be supported by Leopard, or will the entire file system be based off this?

    I remember reading that article on Arstechnica and the idea of Time Machine with ZFS sounded pretty interesting.
     
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    Mexico
    #4
    Cool! I love ZFS!
     
  5. macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,712
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #5
    ZFS makes me a little bit horny. Just a bit. First filesystem to do that since BFS, actually.

    OH NO I'M CHEATING ON MY FIRST FILESYSTEM LOVE! :eek:
     
  6. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    73
    #6
    wtf? i hav absolutely no idea what it is, but it sounds cool... YAY!
     
  7. macrumors newbie

    Paranoidmarvin

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    25
    Location:
    Morayshire, Scotland
    #7
    HFS is getting tired, you can tell by the number of names they have tacked onto the end (HFS+ Journaled)!
    Bring on ZFS, it makes sense with Time machine
     
  8. macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,712
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #8
    If they actually use its built-in diff/snapshot ability for Time Machine instead of the ugly hack onto HFS+ we saw as of the original dev preview, I might have to go offer my body up to any of Apple's filesystem developers.
     
  9. Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,026
    Location:
    Currently in Switzerland
    #9
    For us poor plebeians, what the hell does the adoption of ZFS bring anyway? Is it just another geeky filesystem, or something that might really make a difference for ordinary users?

    At least HFS enabled much bigger storage and more sensible partitioning back then...could any of you clarify this issue for the non-file server admins out there? Thanks.
     
  10. macrumors 68020

    SeaFox

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,037
    Location:
    Somewhere Else
    #10
    Awesome. The idea of being able to use ZFS in OSX was quite exciting to me when I first read the rumors before. Especially the "pooled storage" method. I assume this would be the end of one's home folder being full because the drive it resides on is full, since an additional drive added to the machine would just add to the shared pool for storage. The home folder would no longer be limited to a single device. That and the redundancy and backup features.

    Ars Technica has suggested that this would be required for Time Machine to function, but isn't Time Machine already included in the developer's previews?
     
  11. macrumors demi-god

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    18,111
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #11

    The Zettabyte file system is 128-bit for one.
     
  12. Moderator emeritus

    kainjow

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2000
    Messages:
    7,743
    #12
    Zis iz zery awezome! :D
     
  13. Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    5,026
    Location:
    Currently in Switzerland
    #13
    Meaning..?
     
  14. macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,315
    Location:
    The soggy part of the Pacific NW
    #14
    ZFS isn't currently bootable; but I'm not sure that matters since OS X uses a separate boot partition.

    The big draw with ZFS, AFAIK, is it has the ability to manage differential file snapshots. So Time Machine would be a heck of a lot faster than if it's managed by an application within the OS.

    I would bet that, with Leopard, it'll be an option but not the default. Analogous to the way case-sensitive HFS+ is currently handled. I'd be tempted to try it if it's available.

    I wonder how it will handle resource forks though? I don't know if ZFS has that sort of thing available.
     
  15. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3
    #15
    And how that means what to regular users?

    Edit: Slow :)
     
  16. macrumors demi-god

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    18,111
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #16
    A later release of Leopard will be 128 bit instead of 64 bit ;)
     
  17. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    18
    Location:
    London, UK
    #17

    There are at least 3 links helpfully given in the article at the begining of the thread to clear, useful, not over-technical discussion and description of zfs. You should read them.
     
  18. Moderator emeritus

    kainjow

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2000
    Messages:
    7,743
    #18
    Check out ZFS Boot.
     
  19. macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,712
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #19
    Seriously, just read the John Sicarusa Fat.Bits blog linked in the newspost. It's easy to read and explains all the advantages of ZFS.
     
  20. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2002
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    #20
    ZFS vs WinFS (SQL-database-filesystem)?

    I don't really know what I'm talking about as I'm no filesystem guru by any means, but I do remember rumors in the past of Windows and/or OS X going to some kind of sql-database-driven-super-efficient-fast-revolutionary-metadata filesystem. My question is how does ZFS compare to that??? How does it compare to the [vaporware] WinFS???
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    810
    #21
    Let's run through a simple example.

    You have 1 hard drive right? You are running out of space. You go buy another drive. You want to add it to the system but now you have to decide whether you want that drive to just handle storage of files, and if so which files? Well, how about this instead? You can add the drive as a pool. It then "magically" appears as if your original drive is now x gigabytes larger than it is since it is using two drives as a pool. Convenient no?

    Or how about you want to backup that drive instead? Ok, add a drive to the system. Add it to the pool, tell it to mirror the drive instead. It now copies the data from one drive to the other and any changes mirror the other. If a corrupt file is on drive 1 (your original working copy) it checks the other to see if the backup is non-corrupt. If so, it opens that file, and copies the good data to the original drive as good data. It does this with Checksums of the files.

    Another for the geekiness factor is RAIDZ. One drive or two can be a parity drive. Ever use PAR files? Yup very similar. You have files or a whole drive disappear? You can pretty much restore it from the parity drive if enough of the data still exists, etc.

    Or how about you like having "versions" of your filesystem. You're about to update OS X to 10.5.2 and you're afraid it might break your system. So you create a ZFS snapshot. It now olds this "snapshot" of your filesystem and the files in it. You install the new update, it does indeed bork your computer. So you tell OS X and ZFS to use a previous snapshot, boom. You're back to 10.5.1 and it works.

    Also the idea of using ZFS with time machine, is really really cool. Also, on the fly compression of your files. With no real performance hit. Another neat one is built in encryption. So you'll be able to have file vault at the filesystem level rather than the OS X application/OS level.
     
  22. macrumors 68020

    sparkleytone

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Messages:
    2,307
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #22
    Think about these things:

    1) Shutting down your Mac Pro, opening it up and adding another hard drive. When you boot back into OS X, it tells you that you have added another hard drive and asks whether or not you'd like to add it to your "Macintosh HD" or whatever you call it. When you say yes, it automatically adds the space to your available space, and also automagically spreads your data out in the most efficient ways.

    2) One of your hard drives on your Mac begins to corrupt data. Your filesystem automatically detects this, AND heals it by recreating the data on one of the other HD's in your ZFS pool.

    3) Each user on your system literally has their own entire filesystem devoted to their data. No reasons to use quotas, as the actual filesystem is only a certain size that you set.

    4) Each of the very small text files on your system, of which there are thousands, take up the size that they are instead of the fs block size. Lots of unused and previously unusable space saved.

    5) Having multiple "snapshots" of your data, in the paradigm of Time Machine. Except get this...each snapshot is a snapshot of how the blocks look, not your files. So the size of each snapshot is only however much space it takes to record what blocks have changed.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,442
    #23
    ZFS is a file system (a very capable modern one) so the later part of your question doesn't make sense. If you mean "will Apple make ZFS the default file system for Mac OS X?" then I would say "not likely any time soon (but I would be happy to be wrong)".
     
  24. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Messages:
    284
    Location:
    Hobart, Australia
    #24
    This sounds very interesting, always good to be able to use the latest new tech.

    From the Wikipedia article: "Populating 128-bit file systems would exceed the quantum limits of earth-based storage. You couldn't fill a 128-bit storage pool without boiling the oceans."

    I wonder how long until we hit that limit :p
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    kresh

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    808
    Location:
    In a strange land, waiting on the arrival of my Ki
    #25
    I did not see a menu option for compression. I really like ZFS' 2-3x (on the fly) compression. I hope it is supported.
     

Share This Page