With [Oracle] Solaris 11 coming out with a requirement of ZFS on the root disk, I was curious to know who is using the Zeta File System now?
I have been using ZFS for the past year and don't plan to go back to UFS since ZFS is much more reliable and easier to maintain.
lol,... still on the old UFS,....
I have been using ZFS since its first early release in november 2005 and I am very satisfied with its features. I'm strongly missing it when I have to run other OSes that do not support it.
Yeah, I use it too.
I wonder if there is any equivalent (and stable) technology for Linux.
I googled it, and there it was 
The first item in the FAQ babbles on about licensing.
Interesting 
I use it. It's great for managing snapshots and backups, and other file system maintenance tasks.
I am not really impressed with its performance, however, especially as a swap device. In my spare time (ha!) I'd love to do a comparison of swap performance between ZFS swap and raw swap partitions. I strongly suspect the raw partitions will be MUCH faster.
If your system is significantly using the swap device, I doubt whether it is backed by a raw device or a zvol is going to make that much of a difference as you'll have "no" performance anyway.
Except that when using a Solaris box as a SunRay server, the ZFS-backed swap device shouldn't be slow enough to cause any user's GUI to hang for 10+ seconds whenever something needs to swapped in from disk.
And nevermind about how ZFS bunches writes in a way that throws away long opportunities to actually be writing data to disk. Those chances to actually do IO are lost forever. If you actually have to write a lot of data to disk and do it fast, ZFS is not a good choice.
Dear!
10 votes for ZFS using, some people here talked about ZFS which they're using. But, no one talk or share their reasons why did they use ZFS?
I've used ZFS, however, I did not know much about it, due to the job I've worked, I'm DBA. Of course, I must understand little, about OS. So, may I ask for some questions:
1- When ZFS was configured, do I use Zone?
2- Solaris has got partitioning, but, I think, the partitioning in Solaris was soft, not hard-ware like HP. Which benifit of partitioning did ZFS bring to?
Thank you!
Here are the first that come in mind: robustness, data is guaranteed to be always consistent. Never need to fsck even after a brutal poweroff. Creating a mirror or a striped configuration is dead easy. No need to anticipate or even bother with file system and/or partition sizes. No more need to edit /etc/(v)fstab. Architecture neutrality (SPARC/x86), import/export pools, compression, encryption, deduplication, ditto blocks, sharenfs, sharesmb, snapshots, clones, send/receive streams, zvols.
ZFS and Solaris zones are unrelated.
Solaris supports both soft and hard partitioning on SPARC. VirtualBox is kind of hard partitioning on x86. There is again little relationship with ZFS.
Matey I dont understand those questions.
To me ZFS is file system type.
Zoning and lets say Vbox(product) are two totaly different ways of virtualisation.
I use it on Solaris and on GNU/Linux. Very satisfied. Binary kernel modules for 64-bit versions of Fedora, RHEL and Ubuntu now available. See http://www.kqstor.com/
Is that KQ stor thing stable?
Using it, haven't noticed a performance hit, love the snapshots.