Hi! > Am 01.05.2019 um 02:14 schrieb Michelle Sullivan <[email protected]>: > And the irony is the FreeBSD policy to default to zfs on new installs using > the complete drive.. even when there is only one disk available and > regardless of the cpu or ram class... with one usb stick I have around here > it attempted to use zfs on one of my laptops.
But *any* filesystem other than ZFS on a single disk and non-ECC memory is worse! So what’s gained by defaulting back to UFS in these cases? There’s the edge case of embedded/very low memory systems but people who build these probably know what they are doing? And of course I use UFS in VMs running on a host with ZFS … depending on whether I need the snapshot/replication features in the guest or not. Kind regards, Patrick -- punkt.de GmbH Internet - Dienstleistungen - Beratung Kaiserallee 13a Tel.: 0721 9109-0 Fax: -100 76133 Karlsruhe [email protected] http://punkt.de AG Mannheim 108285 Gf: Juergen Egeling _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
