ZFS in Ubuntu 16.04

repoman0

Diamond Member
Jun 17, 2010
5,139
4,462
136
I just set up a mirrored ReFS storage space with 4TB drives in Windows. I wish there was some way to have a local 2 drive mirrored ZFS file system accessible to both Windows and Linux ... i.e., without a NAS which I really have no use for. I might just have to suck it up and build one, since I still need Windows but would like to start switching to Linux as much as possible.

I'm also excited to see if Mint 18 / Ubuntu 16.04 help solve my broadcom 802.11ac wifi issues with the new 4.4 kernel ...
 

Essence_of_War

Platinum Member
Feb 21, 2013
2,650
4
81
dave_the_nerd said:
You are clearly the only person excited about this. :p :whiste: :wub:

I know! I was sad having the thread party all by myself! :D

I wish there was some way to have a local 2 drive mirrored ZFS file system accessible to both Windows and Linux ... i.e., without a NAS which I really have no use for.
Windows doesn't even do r/w access for the ext2/3/4 family, I think they have an ->0% chance of being able to import zpools. Your best bet is probably roll-your-own NAS with freebsd (and variants like freenas or nas4free), or ubuntu 16.04.

ZFSonLinux and the Solaris Porting Layer (SPL) have been stable for quite a while, but I'd be interested to see how many bugs, edge cases, etc crawl out of the woodwork when you've got a big audience like ubuntu users who will now suddenly have easy access to it. Could be very exciting. Maybe the renewed interest will spark some real work on the transparent encryption so that the openzfs community will close the feature gap with Solaris?
 

jhu

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
11,918
9
81
I just use FreeBSD instead. Always good to try out something none-Linux.
 

Essence_of_War

Platinum Member
Feb 21, 2013
2,650
4
81
I just use FreeBSD instead. Always good to try out something none-Linux.

It's cool, I only run linux from branded smartos zones, you gotta keep that penguin on lockdown. :sneaky: :D
 

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,160
509
126
I've simply been using Solaris still on my old Ultra 40. It is finally starting to show it's age (I mean, it is probably close to 20 years old now) with 2GB RAM, dual 400MHz UltraSparc processors. The processing power is what you really feel the most, but it still does alright serving out my ZFS filesystem to the rest of my network (and acting as my own sftp server).

At one point I had it in my DMZ so I had access to my own net based storage from anywhere. I spent quite a bit a time hardening it, and setting up some spoof information (changed everything I could so that all the basic response information made it look like a Windows OS, only a detailed timing scanner/identify software would betray it was a Solaris network stack remotely, at which point my firewall would have already blocked their access before they could complete the scan). I had written a program that read the live firewall connection data which could write new block rules on the fly to ban IP addresses, subnets, and even all addresses assigned to that particular ISP (it looked up the whois information and kept track of number of attempts over periods of time and how many from the various subnet or ISP block to determine at what level to ban the IPs).


Anyway, it has my ZFS there...
 

you2

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2002
6,535
1,570
136
in 1995 i preferred freebsd; but by 2004 I was on the linux band-wagon (freebsd had better server support but linux had better media support). While freebsd has better kernel features; I would be hard press to switch back to freebsd since linux continues to provide better media support (in the end you can run all the software on both platform it is just a matter of hassle level; and freebsd for years resisted ide hardware; while their reasons were good; the home environment demanded quality ide support though today i have no clue how good sata support is between the two os).
-
As to zfs; I started using it a bit over a year ago on linux; happy that my updates will be a lot faster now that ubuntu provides the .ko prebuilt. However, I might stick with the ppa to get updates faster. The freebsd version of zfs a bit more complete but for my home usage linux zfs support is pretty darn good (enough).
 

Essence_of_War

Platinum Member
Feb 21, 2013
2,650
4
81
Yes! Ubuntu releases are of the form XX.04 or XX.10

"XX.04" is an LTS if "XX" is even, so 12.04, 14.04, 16.04 are all LTS editions.
 

frowertr

Golden Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,372
41
91
The problem with LTS is that it's a myth. If you ever have to deal with Canonical for tech support, they will immediately tell you to update to their latest non-LTS release if you discover a bug. There is no real "support" for LTS. I've dealt with this before and I was left scratching my head wondering what the hell.

I've since decided this is a good enough reason (among numerous others) never to run Ubuntu for mission critical production systems and to stick with CentOS or OpenSuse.
 

fackamato

Junior Member
Jul 30, 2011
14
0
66
The problem with LTS is that it's a myth. If you ever have to deal with Canonical for tech support, they will immediately tell you to update to their latest non-LTS release if you discover a bug. There is no real "support" for LTS. I've dealt with this before and I was left scratching my head wondering what the hell.

I've since decided this is a good enough reason (among numerous others) never to run Ubuntu for mission critical production systems and to stick with CentOS or OpenSuse.

LTS releases only get security updates, no? No other updates (once they're no longer current).