Talk:ZFS/Archive 1

Archive 1

Page info

This page is the result of an WP:RFC at Talk:ZFS, in which it was agreed to refactor the ZFS related pages into (at last) a page covering the file system, and a page covering the history and implementations.

This page is a stub - it will be updated to move content from the original pages over the next while, as time permits. Please help!

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 11:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Page history

For others wondering where the history of this page went, it is at Oracle ZFS.

@MSGJ: May I suggest that the history of this page be moved back to History and implementations of ZFS and that the history of Oracle ZFS be reinstated here? It has thousands of edits related to ZFS but the current history of this page just has a handful of "Splitting content from ZFS" edits. I would also suggest that Talk:Oracle ZFS and Talk:Oracle ZFS/Archive 1 be moved back here to Talk:ZFS. I feel the edit history and talk page history has sort of disappeared (or at least made inaccessible). --85.220.12.159 (talk) 22:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

You know what, I don't understand the requested move and discussion at Talk:Oracle ZFS. But I reinstated the previous intro of what is now Oracle ZFS because for me as a general reader I do not expect to enter "ZFS" and read an introduction about the licensing and forking history of the not-yet-defined term ZFS, I expect to know what this filesystem is. --85.220.12.159 (talk) 22:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Please see previous discussion at Talk:Oracle ZFS, especially the 2020 RM. I reorganised the articles in a way which I believe reflects the consensus there, effectively undoing part of the 2018 reorganisation. However, I agree that many historical revisions of the article now known as Oracle ZFS cover ZFS in general and would ideally be part of this article's history. Certes (talk) 23:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I undid IP's reversion because I believe 2020 RM addressed this same confusion. Their action contradicts consensus reached by the discussion, re-hashing a closed question. IP's reversion only duplicated information found later in the article. Hireddense (talk) 11:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Data recovery

"This led to threads in online forums where ZFS developers sometimes tried to provide ad-hoc help to home and other small scale users, facing loss of data due to their inadequate design or poor system management." Link is not to a thread in a "online forum" but to a blog post about data recovery by preeminent ZFS developers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.71.26 (talk) 08:09, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Other limitations specific to ZFS

"Other limitations specific to ZFS" mostly aren't specific to ZFS. "Capacity expansion is normally achieved by adding groups of disks as a top-level vdev: simple device, RAID-Z, RAID Z2, RAID Z3, or mirrored..." is not a limitation. It mostly describe how RAID topology works. "IOPS performance of a ZFS storage pool can suffer if the ZFS raid is not appropriately configured." As is the case with all RAIDs. "Resilver (repair) of a failed disk in a ZFS RAID can take a long time which is not unique to ZFS, it applies to all types of RAID, in one way or another." Statement even admits this is not particular to ZFS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.71.26 (talk) 08:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

I concur. Much of this just seems like padding to try to give the impression that there are greater limitations than actually exist. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 08:29, 21 November 2023 (UTC)