New Apple File System Coming in macOS High Sierra Won't Work With Fusion Drives

antonis said:
Obviously there won't be any more macs with spinning or mixed (fusion) drives, and that's cool. The existing owners, though, might get pissed.
Click to expand...

Why? Will their Macs suddenly stop working because they cannot (yet) update to Apple's next-generation file system?

If anything the people upgrading to the NEW file system should be concerned that dozens and dozens of their older apps suddenly might NOT work, not even launching because those apps have not been updated to support the new file system. You do realize that even thousands of Mac App Store apps still do not support popular (Mac) file systems that were in place years ago? See screenshot below for the warning that comes with many Aspyr and Feral games. So this new APFS is likely to break many older apps.



warning.png
 
The article should be renamed to include mechanical drives as well, not just fusion drives.
Not that it is macrumors' job to inform people, but since you are doing it anyway, might as well do it right.
 
Solomani said:
Why? Will their Macs suddenly stop working because they cannot (yet) update to Apple's next-generation file system?

If anything the people upgrading to the NEW file system should be concerned that dozens and dozens of their older apps suddenly might NOT work, not even launching because those apps have not been updated to support the new file system. You do realize that even thousands of Mac App Store apps still do not support popular (Mac) file systems that were in place years ago? See screenshot below for the warning that comes with many Aspyr and Feral games. So this new APFS is likely to break many older apps.



View attachment 719146
Click to expand...

An app (or an API for that matter) should be agnostic of the filesystem type, as long as the operating system underneath can read and write natively on it. I assume that you are referring to the case-sensitive HFS+ apple is offering for quite some time now, that still remains forbidden for a huge number of apps. But case sensitive HFS+ is a different story. The problem there is not the filesystem itself. The problem is that nobody bothered to fix the issues that emerge from a feature of case-sensitive HFS+ (and it is indeed a feature, not a bug); the fact that it is case sensitive ! So the problem is not with the filesystem per se.

APFS is not the same case. It supposedly adds features under the hood that are lacking from the ancient filesystem they are offering now, while still working with the good, old, case insensitive apps on top. It worked in iOS and they took their sweet time to bring it to macOS (IIRC it was initially supposed to be available in macOS sometime in past winter). From a company that drops ports and features that easily from every device they make, I expect to push forward towards APFS in every device from now on. My guess is that it won't be long before HFS+ will be called a legacy filesystem (again IIRC, they called it old themselves during the APFS mention in high sierra). At least, this time it will definitely be for the best. With the exception of fusion drives not working with it, I'm with apple in this.
 
winston1236 said:
Can you still return it? I just replaced my 3TB Fusion HDD portion in my iMac due to failure with an SSD and it's unbelievable how much faster the machine is overall.

There's no way I would do a fusion drive setup again, if you need large capacity storage an external HDD connected via usb3 or thunderbolt dock would be better.
Click to expand...
Nothing is certain until it's released. Beta released are not final releases. You acknowledge the risk and uncertainties of installing Beta software when you join the Beta program. It can wipe your hard drive clean on a whim and you have no one to blame but yourself for installing it.
 
Glassed Silver said:
They rushed / didn't care when they decided to only checksum metadata and not the actual user data.

That's like making the addressee of a letter water-proof because the mailbox seems like it has a broken lid and could get wet, but leave the letter itself as it is, written in beautiful, fragile ink.
Click to expand...

As far as I am able to tell, they reason that since they control the whole stack (including SSD firmware) they're able to prevent bitrot at the hardware level.

I would agree with them, except people also store data on external drives. I was very much looking forward to having APFS support checksums for external drives.

Currently however, I'm doing something even better. For all my photos, I create PAR2 files. So even if they get damaged somehow, I have a much better chance of recovery. It's a hassle though, because it's all commandline wizardry at the moment.
 
bartvk said:
As far as I am able to tell, they reason that since they control the whole stack (including SSD firmware) they're able to prevent bitrot at the hardware level.

I would agree with them, except people also store data on external drives. I was very much looking forward to having APFS support checksums for external drives.

Currently however, I'm doing something even better. For all my photos, I create PAR2 files. So even if they get damaged somehow, I have a much better chance of recovery. It's a hassle though, because it's all commandline wizardry at the moment.
Click to expand...
You can't prevent bit-rot on the hardware level with media like HDDs and SSDs.

If that were possible the manufacturers would deploy such wizardry firmware themselves and nobody would have to bank on Apple just picking the right apples from the trees and supply the magic powder in form of firmware.

Either way, the point about non-stock storage just stresses the need for self-healing mechanisms on the file system level.

It's true that there ARE mechanisms to greatly reduce errors on storage media on the hardware-level, but nothing is perfect and whilst checksumming and recovery information would introduce certain disadvantages I think they are very neglicable if you could at the same time state that Mac comes with rock-solid data storage and that backups are truly the only thing you have to supply yourself so to speak.

As for PAR2, it is a very good method to protect data against bitrot, but unfortunately the implementation is, as you said yourself, very cumbersome.

Personally I started using recovery info (20%) in all my rar archives that I deem extremely important.

Very good for "cold storage", meh for anything you still have to touch or edit regularly.

I'm currently planning a server deployment for my home, so data integrity is a big concern and I have yet to decide how I will ensure it. I'd love to use ZFS, but on the other hand I'd love to use unRAID as the OS, unfortunately it's not compatible with ZFS. :oops:

Glassed Silver:win
 
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
Gonna be a bunch of people upset for no reason other than they don't get something others got. They have no idea the benefits this change brings but damned if they'll let that lack of knowledge stop them from complaining!
Click to expand...

or perhaps they tested out the first few betas only to find that their iMacs have been stripped of its compatibility and they don't want to revert back?
 
#381
↑
Can you still return it? I just replaced my 3TB Fusion HDD portion in my iMac due to failure with an SSD and it's unbelievable how much faster the machine is overall.

There's no way I would do a fusion drive setup again, if you need large capacity storage an external HDD connected via usb3 or thunderbolt dock would be better.

jagooch said:
Nothing is certain until it's released. Beta released are not final releases. You acknowledge the risk and uncertainties of installing Beta software when you join the Beta program. It can wipe your hard drive clean on a whim and you have no one to blame but yourself for installing it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure your comment was directed to me?
 
MacRumors said:



When macOS High Sierra is released to the public next week, the new Apple File System (APFS) feature will be limited to Macs with all-flash built-in storage, which means it won't work with iMacs and Mac minis that include Fusion Drives.

Macs with Fusion Drives were converted to APFS during the beta testing process in the first macOS High Sierra beta, but support was removed in subsequent betas and not reimplemented.

With the release of the Golden Master version of the software, Apple has confirmed APFS will not be available for Fusion Drives and has provided instructions for converting from APFS back to the standard HFS+ format.

macoshighsierra-800x464.jpg

Public Beta testers who had a Mac with a Fusion Drive converted to APFS will need to follow a long list of instructions to convert back to HFS+, including making a Time Machine Backup, creating a bootable installer, and using Disk Utility to reformat their Macs and reinstall macOS High Sierra.

Apple on September 5 published a support document confirming compatibility. When customers with an all-flash machine upgrade to macOS High Sierra install the update next week, their drives will be converted to AFPS. Apple explicitly says "Fusion Drives and hard disk drives aren't converted."

Apple says APFS will not be supported on Fusion Drives "in the initial release of macOS High Sierra," which suggests support could be added for Fusion Drives at a later date after lingering bugs are worked out.

Apple File System is a more modern file system than HFS+ and is optimized for solid state drives. It is safe and secure, offering crash protection, safe document saves, stable snapshots, simplified backups, and strong native encryption.

appleapfs-800x245.jpg

It's also more responsive than HFS+ with features like instant file and directory cloning, fast directory sizing, high performance parallelized metadata operations, and sparse file writes.

Apple plans to release macOS High Sierra on Monday, September 25.

Article Link: New Apple File System Coming in macOS High Sierra Won't Work With Fusion Drives
Click to expand...
[doublepost=1505926207][/doublepost]That is SO COMPLETELY UNTRUE. I am running High Sierra GM candidate 1 right now on my 2012 Mac Mini with fusion drive on it, and it is running just fine without any issue whatsoever.
 

Attachments

  • E2D4C6E4-C4D6-4BCD-81A2-BA085B7A9C59.jpeg
    E2D4C6E4-C4D6-4BCD-81A2-BA085B7A9C59.jpeg
    158.2 KB · Views: 107
  • 18A367A0-28ED-49F4-A245-4C3CEAFAF77C.jpeg
    18A367A0-28ED-49F4-A245-4C3CEAFAF77C.jpeg
    260.8 KB · Views: 108
  • DDCE29AC-A218-480C-BE98-35639C6AC388.jpeg
    DDCE29AC-A218-480C-BE98-35639C6AC388.jpeg
    389.2 KB · Views: 89
freaknprtorican said:
or perhaps they tested out the first few betas only to find that their iMacs have been stripped of its compatibility and they don't want to revert back?
Click to expand...

They clearly understood the risk that any or all features included in the beta may not be present in the release version. Apple makes it very clear this is the case to all beta testers.
 
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
They clearly understood the risk that any or all features included in the beta may not be present in the release version. Apple makes it very clear this is the case to all beta testers.
Click to expand...

Not only that, why hold back an entire OS for a SMALL feature? Yes, I find APFS a small feature compared to HEVC video playback, UI on Metal so animations are smooth and more OS tweaks.
 
Kamazadi said:
[doublepost=1505926207][/doublepost]That is SO COMPLETELY UNTRUE. I am running High Sierra GM candidate 1 right now on my 2012 Mac Mini with fusion drive on it, and it is running just fine without any issue whatsoever.
Click to expand...

We did this on 2 Mac Mini 2012 1TB Fusion, and both had severe issues (the system was sluggish to no end). Analyzing disk processes in terminal seemed to point to the intelligent Fusion properties lost (so we were now loading a lot of stuff off the slow HDD that should haven). It never healed itself, and - even in your case - the system no longer showed Fusion drives but identified as one, big SSD. I believe Apple found that at the very least, the conversion from CoreStorage Fusion to APFS (or even new setup of APFS on fusion) caused the actual Fusion part to not function (making the interaction between SSD and HDD totally random). Remember, the Mac has no idea that there are 2 drives. It was CoreStorage that did the 'intelligence' of moving the 'right stuff' to the SSD.
If it still works in your case, great - but it appears that was a major issue during the betas and into GM...
 
xWhiplash said:
Not only that, why hold back an entire OS for a SMALL feature? Yes, I find APFS a small feature compared to HEVC video playback, UI on Metal so animations are smooth and more OS tweaks.
Click to expand...

I don't call issues with the file system a "small feature". More to the point, what other problems did they NOT spot with the filesystem none of you know about? A year from now you find your older files are corrupt? Yeah, it's not a bad idea to not adopt a new file system immediately regardless unless you enjoy being a guinea pig. As for the rest, I've had full Metal support for my Mini for UI since El Capitan and KODI has had HEVC support for years. You're talking about APPS. Try a spacebar preview with an iTunes movie and see how well "integrated" it is with the OS (hint: it won't let you view it unless you use iTunes or better yet have removed their encryption already, the latter of which will let you finally move AWAY from iTunes to something better like KODI, which runs on dozens of devices instead of one overpriced AppleTV (that has no support so far for Dolby Atmos or DTS:X or DTS of any kind, really, even though M4V files can hold DTS on them and KODI will read them just fine).
 
I've read most of this thread, and I haven't seen any mention of Microsoft's new file system, ReFS ("Resilient File System"). It was introduced over five years ago, and still doesn't support being the bootable drive of a system. It's also gone through at least six iterations, with varying levels of compatibility between versions. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReFS#Version_history_and_compatibility for some more information.)

In this context, Apple is moving blazingly fast to deploy APFS across its lineup of products. I'm sure it's annoying that Fusion drives will take a little longer to be supported, but I'm sure they'll be supported far before Microsoft allows ReFS to become bootable.
 
xWhiplash said:
Not only that, why hold back an entire OS for a SMALL feature? Yes, I find APFS a small feature compared to HEVC video playback, UI on Metal so animations are smooth and more OS tweaks.
Click to expand...

Apple said it themselves. APFS in High Sierra is just laying some of the building blocks for the future. It's not something they HAVE to have right this minute. It's a first small step in the direction they're headed. It's not as if they pulled back the most critical feature in the OS and aren't still planning to head that direction.
 
MagnusVonMagnum said:
I don't call issues with the file system a "small feature". More to the point, what other problems did they NOT spot with the filesystem none of you know about? A year from now you find your older files are corrupt? Yeah, it's not a bad idea to not adopt a new file system immediately regardless unless you enjoy being a guinea pig. As for the rest, I've had full Metal support for my Mini for UI since El Capitan and KODI has had HEVC support for years. You're talking about APPS. Try a spacebar preview with an iTunes movie and see how well "integrated" it is with the OS (hint: it won't let you view it unless you use iTunes or better yet have removed their encryption already, the latter of which will let you finally move AWAY from iTunes to something better like KODI, which runs on dozens of devices instead of one overpriced AppleTV (that has no support so far for Dolby Atmos or DTS:X or DTS of any kind, really, even though M4V files can hold DTS on them and KODI will read them just fine).
Click to expand...
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
Apple said it themselves. APFS in High Sierra is just laying some of the building blocks for the future. It's not something they HAVE to have right this minute. It's a first small step in the direction they're headed. It's not as if they pulled back the most critical feature in the OS and aren't still planning to head that direction.
Click to expand...

I think you guys misunderstood me. I am saying there is no point delaying High Sierra due to APFS not working well on fusion drives. APFS is not the only thing in High Sierra. So I am glad they are still releasing it even though fusion drives won’t get APFS.
 
ibivibiv said:
The kind that needs to sell more highly marked up more expensive SSD's lol ;)
Click to expand...
No, I think Apple makes a lot more selling those ghetto 5400 RPM HDDs. Their SSDs are not very expensive for what you get.
 
Last edited:
I think they should drop the Fusion drive and have two SSD tiers. One for slower SSDs running on SATA, and the other for high performance SSDs running on PCIe. That might be more confusing for the general public though.
 
fathergll said:
I'm suddenly really mad that I got the Fusion option in my 2014 5K iMac at home.
Click to expand...
Sucks man. To be fair, SSDs were a lot more expensive option in 2014. Your machine is out of warranty now (or nearly), so you could probably crack it open and swap out the HDD. I haven't looked at guides in recent years but know it was possible in the past. OWC usually has drives and iFixit usually has guides. Though eventually they'll update it to support Fusion Drives. My old 2012 iMac at work (sitting next to my new one) has a fusion drive. I'll probably just use it as an external monitor once I get a thunderbolt cable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top