So it was just announced that ZFS won’t be the default filesystem in Leopard. Talk about a bummer… but not shocking really. I feel bad for Jonathan, not because he was wrong, but because its really easy for misunderstandings to come from a single comment. Lets review:
“In fact, this week you’ll see that Apple is announcing at their Worldwide Developers Conference that ZFS has become the file system in Mac OS 10,” Schwartz said.
ZFS being the “default” filesystem wasn’t said, but implied. Its possible that it will be the default or preferred for OS X Server, who knows. While Jonathan and I don’t hang out for Sunday brunch, I would tend to think this is one of those situations where a single comment becomes a big story and people start inferring things that maybe they shouldn’t. Maybe ZFS becoming the default FS was discussed and then retracted? Who knows. But I’ve seen this stuff happen a couple times now first hand and its sooooo easy to happen.
The first hand knowledge that I have has gone back and forth. First ZFS was in, then it was out, then it was in but read-only at least initially, then it was said that that was a mistake and it will be Read/Write but no provided as the default FS. Its hard to say really when these issues tend to be more marketing driven than technical.
I did want to respond to one line in the story though:
“Skeptics have said that ZFS as the default file system in Leopard made no sense. Among the problems in using ZFS is that it wasn’t designed for consumer use, and it uses up a lot of processing power.”
Thats a load of crap. ZFS is designed for a wide range of applications including consumer. Thats the beauty of ZFS, it flies everywhere from 256MB Thumb Drive to EMC DMX without skipping a beat. And it certainly does NOT use up a lot of processing power. I use ZFS on everything, from the X4100 and T1000 nodes at Joyent, to X4500 Thumpers, to NetApp Filers via iSCSI, to my home storage arrays, to my 30GB Video iPod… CPU has never been an issue, ever.
Whatever happens with OS X, so long as ZFS is present I’m happy, because it means that all my USB drives, backup disks, and iPod data are accessible on OS X and not just my Solaris systems. And, with the added iSCSI Support in Leopard I can finally use those data stores from my MacBook Pro as well.
Story is wrong. The Apple guy said that Apple hasn’t announced ZFS yet. And ‘no comment’ to the rest of the questions.
I think that people is asking too much for apple…including a new filesystem and releasing it for leoprad it’s too much work. They may add support for formatting and using zfs, but asking them to put it as default so soon is crazy. They need to develop gui tools, or they may need some feauture that sun is still working on.
Ben have you seen today’s news saying that Apple claims ZFS is not included in 10.5? Not talking defaults here — they say it isn’t even included, period.
I just can’t believe they still haven’t tied TimeMachine with ZFS. How can they put in a a filesystem with SnapShot capabilities and not hook it in with the backup/restore side of things? They still require a second external drive which is an unnecessary hassle for desktop users and plain impossible for laptop users.
I was hoping when ZFS was announced that part of the delay in Leopard was redoing TimeMachnie working on a single disk.
Errr, I take back my comment.
The Slashdot article was in error, an editor replied to the linked story saying Apple contacted them to say ZFS would be an option but no the default.
Hooray!
The follow-up story is up now…
Apple Clarifies Status of ZFS File System In Mac OS
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=199903525
I think there problem is largely lack of boot support, especially as most macs are laptops. The Tiger -> Leopard upgrade would be a nightmare (well, impossible) for most existing users.
Agree that Time Machine is going to stink without ZFS backing, though.
I’ll be slicing my disk when I get a mac in advance.
Clariication: when I say laptops are a problem, I mean ‘single disk, single HFS partition’. The ‘ZFS isn’t for the desktop’ argument is just silly.
“In fact, this week you’ll see that Apple is announcing at their Worldwide Developers Conference that ZFS has become the file system in Mac OS 10,” Schwartz said.
He should have used “a file system”.
ZFS does not work well on single core / single cpu systems. Running on my Blade, ZFS seems to have pulse, pegging the CPU about once per second. On multicore systems is is a non-issue.
Still finding zfs-backed iscsi volumes to be painfully slow in production. E.g. on a ZFS system capable of sustaining >200MB/sec, the iSCSI target (and only that) will be chugging along at a whopping 3MB/sec on anything involving random reads/writes.
And of course ZFS gives us no tools to gain insight into block behaviours etc.
If I were Apple’s engineers, I’d be skipping ZFS mainly because the tools are so half-baked right now. Sun’s marketing people will tell you otherwise, of course.
xanax
stromkern
roerlalide
Very interesting article: “ZFS in OS X”
good thanks
http://www.vibramfivefinger.us/ vibram five fingers
It’s very nice! I love what you wrote.
I think we can make friends.
Once you have found a tattoo kits supplier with the best offering products with the reasonable prices, you’re now required to set up your street or online shop.
Tattoo Machine(http://www.idealhere.com/Tattoo-Machines_c238)
http://www.idealhere.com