Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 06:27:01
Message-Id: 521AF45C.1010206@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo by Pandu Poluan
1 On 26/08/2013 08:10, Pandu Poluan wrote:
2 >> The ZFS approach is better - here's the storage, now do with it what I
3 >> want but don't employ arbitrary fixed limits and structures to do it.
4 >>
5 >
6 > +1 on ZFS. It's honestly a truly *modern* filesystem.
7 >
8 > Been using it as the storage back-end of my company's email server.
9 >
10 > The zpool and zfs command may need some time to be familiar with, but
11 > the self-mounting self-sharing ability of zfs (i.e., no need to muck
12 > with fstab and exports files) is really sweet.
13 >
14 > I really leveraged its ability to do what I call "delta snapshot
15 > shipping" (i.e., send only the differences between two snapshots to
16 > another place). It's almost like an asynchronous DRBD, but with the
17 > added peace of mind that if the files become corrupted (due to buggy
18 > app, almost no way for ZFS to let corrupt data exist), I can easily
19 > 'roll back' to the time where the files are still uncorrupted.
20 >
21
22
23 I run it on my NASes, and the thing that really sold me was what it lets
24 me as the admin do:
25
26 I get all the benefits of directories with none of the downsides.
27 I get all the benefits of mount points with none of the downsides.
28 I get all the benefits of discrete filesystems with none of the downsides.
29
30 Like you say, a truly modern fs built for modern needs.
31
32
33
34 --
35 Alan McKinnon
36 alan.mckinnon@×××××.com

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org>