Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Seeds ZFS Read/Write Developer Preview 1.1 for Leopard

Cromulent said:
So you are not basing that off anything then... unless you have downloaded Leopard.

The words arse your pulling out of and information come to mind for some reason.

There is no way as I said before that you can predict what the point releases will do to Leopard in terms of stability and reliability. You have just stated conjecture as fact.
Click to expand...

I have not downloaded Leopard. My first Leopard license will be when I buy an Apple Computer with it installed (following my own good advise).

I am not pulling info out of my a$$. I spell it better than you do :)

I do have "inside information", but since I am not subject to NDA or civil action I am free to do as I wish with it. I incidentally choose not to discuss "confidential technical details", but I do choose to talk about anything already publicly released or leaked or speculated on by people I know to also be "just outside the loop".

As I have posted to other threads I have been by Steve's house.

That said. The discussion is not reliant on non-public info to be accurate and relevant. ZFS is not merely the next thing, it is either the last thing or the next to last thing ever. It simply rocks.

We are entering the "cloud stage" of computing.

We now need Web 2.0 too.

Rocketman
 
Why I want it

the main reason I wanted ZFS was to build a RAIDZ for video editing.

For everyone who thinks that ZFS read only is for time machine, you gotta understand, you have to write to a ZFS pool before it can snapshot it.

I think the reason that it's read only is that it's easier to read a filesystem than write it (Observe how long we've had read access to NTFS drives but not write access in OSX).

And yes I doubt it is going to be the main filesystem for at least another OS release, but i would be happy to be able to connect 4 drives to a mac Pro in 3 months and make a very fast, reliable pool. Or a mac mini :)
 
ChrisA said:
You can boot from a small /boot HFS partition, mount ZFS and then "chroot" into the the ZFS system. Maybe the new Apple computers will have this small /boot partition in flash memory? This would give the Macbook an "instant boot" ability. I can think of other scenarios too where the default file system is not the one you booted from
Click to expand...

You wouldn't chroot. You would just boot from a small partition and mount the appropriate root filesystem.
 
Rocketman said:
I have not downloaded Leopard. My first Leopard license will be when I buy an Apple Computer with it installed (following my own good advise).
Click to expand...

Excellent.

Rocketman said:
I am not pulling info out of my a$$. I spell it better than you do :)
Click to expand...

An ass is a donkey or mule.

Rocketman said:
I do have "inside information", but since I am not subject to NDA or civil action I am free to do as I wish with it. I incidentally choose not to discuss "confidential technical details", but I do choose to talk about anything already publicly released or leaked or speculated on by people I know to also be "just outside the loop".
Click to expand...

Ah, a reliable source if I ever heard one.

Rocketman said:
That said. The discussion is not reliant on non-public info to be accurate and relevant. ZFS is not merely the next thing, it is either the last thing or the next to last thing ever. It simply rocks.

We are entering the "cloud stage" of computing.

We now need Web 2.0 too.

Rocketman
Click to expand...

I agree ZFS is going to be a great improvement. What I took against was you claiming that 10.5 would effectively still be beta software. Plus the claim that it wouldn't be ready for primetime until 10.5.3. This you surely do not know.
 
Cromulent said:
Ah, a reliable source if I ever heard one.
Click to expand...

I do not care how reliable you feel I am. However just to establish by bona fides I took the liberty to make and post several "predictions" last year, and follow and document them, then posted the results to macrumors for posterity.

83% accurate.

Nonetheless, my advise is to trust not what you hear and only half of what you see. Real reporters dual source. I do too.

Rocketman
 
tuartboy said:
Can we expect a migration from HFS+ to ZFS if/when the filesystem is write-able and stable, or is that technically improbable?
Click to expand...

The migration will be: Plug in a new drive, put it under ZFS control (add it to a new or existing zpool) and copy your data to it.

ZFS is fundamentally different than HFS. There is no plausible way to convert HFS to ZFS in place.

/dale
 
Zfs

semireg said:
ZFS will make time machine faster and more usable by allowing snapshots at the filesystem level. You'll be able to plugin an external drive and zam, a few ZFS commands later and a full clone of your mac is made on the external drive. All of the snapshots in between backups can be time machined to.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt, all while utilizing minimal drive space.
 
cowm007 said:
ZFS sounds amazing to me in terms of data reliability and integrity. It'll be a beautiful addition to my Desktop where I keep all my media and data and need 100% redundancy of it.

However, I have a MacBook right now and can't see how it would help me out with only one drive available.
Click to expand...

You can still use ZFS with only one drive. You can even use ZFS on just a particular partition of the drive.

/dale
 
Zfs

phytonix said:
ZFS vs WinFS who will win?
Click to expand...

It seems WinFS re-encodes files with metadata in a less efficient way (at least that's what I've been told) than ZFS. This might cause more latency, more hard drive space to be utilized, or both. -- and who knows when and if WinFS will ever see the light of day.
 
Cromulent. Why the hate on the Rocketman? Speaking only for myself, I have found Rocketman to offer good information around here for quite awhile.

It seems where ZFS will affect the average user, like myself will be in the easy addition of extra hard drive space when we start to build up our war chests of videos and other media. Seems like it will eliminate a lot of decision making. We suddenly don't have to think if we should get the 320 gig, or the 160 or the 500. Running out of space...easily add to the pool and without 20 gazillion icons of hard drives on our desktops.

That is correct, right?
 
mandoman said:
I'll be more excited about ZFS when it is been tried
and tested for awhile under Solaris. Make sure it is rock
solid in the enterprise market first. I'd also be interested if and when any of the Linux distributions pick this up?
Click to expand...

I currently have about 40TB of disk under ZFS control at work (Solaris 10 servers). It's stable.

ZFS cannot be integrated directly into the Linux kernel because Linux's GPL (license) does not permit code not released under the GPL from cohabitating with it. ZFS is released under the CDDL license. There is an implementation of ZFS available for Linux under the FUSE (user-space filesystem framework) project, but it's still in development, not stable, and won't live up to its full potential since it'll have to live outside the kernel context.

/dale
 
Rocketman said:
10.5.0 is for all practical purposes a public beta. 10.5.1 will be worth installing for bleeding edge users. 10.5.2 will probably be installed on shipping hardware (if 10.5.0 or 10.5.1 is, that would be "bad"), and will still require several software updates to use reasonably.

If you are a "trailing edge" user, please do yourself a favor and wait for 10.5.3.

Rocketman

To answer Cromulant I am not subject to NDA. Therefore I am free to talk at will.
Click to expand...



Hell yeah. Anyone who installs a fresh OS like that is just begging to be a test mule. 10.5.2 at least. Nothing earlier.
 
rented mule said:
I was under the impression that ZFS under Solaris was not bootable because it was usually on a computer with BIOS instead of EFI (a larger firmware storage). Since Apple uses EFI, it might be possible to do things not normally possible with the old BIOS firmware.
Click to expand...

When ZFS is given control of an entire hard drive (and not just a portion/partition of one) it writes a EFI label (GUID parition table) to the disk. These are understood by EFI firmware.

BIOS dependson ye olde MBR (master boot record) for partitioning information, a relic that reaches back to the earliest PCs.

/dale
 
DMann said:
It seems WinFS re-encodes files with metadata in a less efficient way (at least that's what I've been told) than ZFS. This might cause more latency, more hard drive space to be utilized, or both. -- and who knows when and if WinFS will ever see the light of day.
Click to expand...

WinFS is a shell around an NTFS filesystem with a SQL DB that contains a bunch of metadata on files. What it was supposed to do is replace the traditional FS with a DB-focused, relationship-oriented, model of file access. The concept of a folder hierarchy was supposed to be nearly non-existent at the user level... but it was really far too ambitious to be backwards compatible, revolutionary, and on time.

ZFS and WinFS really try to solve two different parts of the problems. I would say something like ZFS could be the foundation of something that resembles WinFS in the future, as it solves a bunch of problems that would be really, really helpful to have solved before trying to throw away the traditional file hierarchy.
 
Developers

Stridder44 said:
Hell yeah. Anyone who installs a fresh OS like that is just begging to be a test mule. 10.5.2 at least. Nothing earlier.
Click to expand...

What really creates obstacles is the latency of developers in recoding and optimizing their apps for the new OS.
 
ZFS and WinFS

Krevnik said:
WinFS is a shell around an NTFS filesystem with a SQL DB that contains a bunch of metadata on files. What it was supposed to do is replace the traditional FS with a DB-focused, relationship-oriented, model of file access. The concept of a folder hierarchy was supposed to be nearly non-existent at the user level... but it was really far too ambitious to be backwards compatible, revolutionary, and on time.

ZFS and WinFS really try to solve two different parts of the problems. I would say something like ZFS could be the foundation of something that resembles WinFS in the future, as it solves a bunch of problems that would be really, really helpful to have solved before trying to throw away the traditional file hierarchy.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the clarification.
 
I don't know why some people are worried about installing 10.5.0. Leopard is beautiful to use and stable on PPC and Intel. Perhaps there are some specific applications they're unsure will work correctly? dunno but I have no troubles and use it daily. It has brought new life to my Dual G4 :) and is a dream on a core 2 duo. Frankly I continue to have more frustrations from Vista than I have had from any Leopard seed. I have used Leopard exclusively since WWDC and I'm still excited for official release as I've been waiting to buy some imacs and want Leopard pre-installed. All of this talk about waiting for 10.5.x before installing is nonsense IMHO.
 
cohibadad said:
I don't know why some people are worried about installing 10.5.0. Leopard is beautiful to use and stable on PPC and Intel. Perhaps there are some specific applications they're unsure will work correctly? dunno but I have no troubles and use it daily. It has brought new life to my Dual G4 :) and is a dream on a core 2 duo. Frankly I continue to have more frustrations from Vista than I have had from any Leopard seed. I have used Leopard exclusively since WWDC and I'm still excited for official release as I've been waiting to buy some imacs and want Leopard pre-installed. All of this talk about waiting for 10.5.x before installing is nonsense IMHO.
Click to expand...

There are still some really ugly hangs on a few configurations (especially the configurations Apple is currently shipping).

It isn't horrible, but having the UI hang and force me to sleep the machine to get control back is annoying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back