DaemonForums  

Go Back   DaemonForums > Other Operating Systems > Other BSD and UNIX/UNIX-like

Other BSD and UNIX/UNIX-like Any other flavour of BSD or UNIX that does not have a section of its own.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
wubrgamer's Avatar
wubrgamer wubrgamer is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default ZFS

So, which BSD's have the most comprehensive support for the ZFS file system?
Reply With Quote
  #2   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
mfaridi's Avatar
mfaridi mfaridi is offline
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Afghanistan
Posts: 282
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wubrgamer View Post
So, which BSD's have the most comprehensive support for the ZFS file system?
for right now , none of them support very good , but I think it use in FreeBSD 8
Reply With Quote
  #3   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
wubrgamer's Avatar
wubrgamer wubrgamer is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

So, I'm a linux user who wants to play with a serious unix...ut doesn't want to have to change very much...

like UFS, I'd prefer to stick with JFS or ext3

and I'd like to stick with GRUB, is this possible?
Reply With Quote
  #4   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
18Googol2's Avatar
18Googol2 18Googol2 is offline
Real Name: whoami
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: pwd
Posts: 283
Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
Default

ZFS is natively supported under Solaris

Quote:
Originally Posted by wubrgamer View Post
So, I'm a linux user who wants to play with a serious unix...ut doesn't want to have to change very much...
You want to learn Unix seriously but also stick to the way Linux works, you cant. Because Linux and Unix are quite different.

and I'd like to stick with GRUB, is this possible?[/QUOTE]

Yes
__________________
The power of plain text? It can control an entire OS
Reply With Quote
  #5   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
wubrgamer's Avatar
wubrgamer wubrgamer is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

So....

Can I keep ext3 as /
and can I stick with grub bootloader?


*confused due to quote formatting*
Reply With Quote
  #6   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
lvlamb's Avatar
lvlamb lvlamb is offline
Real Name: Louis V. Lambrecht
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .be
Posts: 221
Thanked 25 Times in 24 Posts
Default

Quote:
I'd prefer to stick with JFS or ext3
AFAIK *not* jfs, but you can share an ext3fs slice with the system.
AFAIK, you cannot install a *BSD on en ext*** file system.
But you can keep the ffs*(OBSD), ufs**(FBSD), zfs**(Solaris) for the ON (Solaris acronyms for Operating system and Networking).
I have such a setup with all data, shared files, home, DB, www, distfiles, /usr/ports, /var/db/portsnap, ... on ext2fs systems ("extended partitions").
AFAIK, only need ON to be on the native filesystem.
All the rest are data (the stuff which is personal to you and you surely not want to lose). Data can be housed wherever you like, even a thumbdrive.
Thumbdrive readable by any ON, just have to chown UID/GID.
__________________
da more I know I know I know nuttin'
Reply With Quote
  #7   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
wubrgamer's Avatar
wubrgamer wubrgamer is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

So what bits of / need to be on ufs or whatever it's called for the distribution I've not chosen yet...?
Reply With Quote
  #8   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
lvlamb's Avatar
lvlamb lvlamb is offline
Real Name: Louis V. Lambrecht
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .be
Posts: 221
Thanked 25 Times in 24 Posts
Default

On FBSD, you mostly would need "minimal install" from sysinstall.
On OBSD, all th stuff with xorg is housed within 528 MB.
Tricks are the /tmp which is used for temporary dstorage of temporary space for reading compressed files. This can be linked to another place, but I don't do it (still reserve 512MB for them).
On current hard drives, rule of thumb, the *BSD's are happy with 4Gigs once you put the /obj, /*/*/*/*/work files elewhere.
Say, my typical *BSD slices are:
/ 256MB (FBSD, OBSD 128MB)
/usr 3G
/tmp 512M
/var 512M (no www. no postgres, no mail, ... only keeping the system's tree, but linking the effective data elsewhere).

In fact, I still have a /usr/home/*, but share my ~/.icons, ~/.themes, ~/.fonts, ~/Documents, ~/Downloads, ~/public_html, ... everyrhing shareable on a /exports/${user} directory.

Advantage: test an ON (other OS or an OS upgrade/update) at full load.

As I am the guy wearing both a belt and suspenders, I first install an upgradre or OS on a flash stick before testing it it on the hard drive.

Other OSes remain on the flash stick, as Slax, puppylinux or the new OpenSolaris mini cd.
Advantage: can boot on any Ethernet cafe allowing flash booting.
____
edit
http://www.milax.org/
the minimal OpenSolaris a la Damn Small Linux, Puppy or Slax.
__________________
da more I know I know I know nuttin'

Last edited by lvlamb; 17th May 2008 at 06:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9   (View Single Post)  
Old 17th May 2008
wubrgamer's Avatar
wubrgamer wubrgamer is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

why are ya'll calling them slices?

do slices=partitions?
Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2008
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

I suggest you read this section and this wikipedia page.


To put it simple:

ad0 -> First PATA Hard Drive using FreeBSDs 'ad' driver.

ad0s1 -> first primary partition on ad0 -- also known as a 'slice'

ad0s1a -> partition 'a' within the disklabel for ad0s1

and so on.


BSD partitioning scheme is different from Linux or DOS and is fully documented.



The slice/partition notation should probably be reversed but I didn't invent the damn thing :\. One BSD slice is a lot like an Extended DOS Partition but you are not limted to haveing 1 of them and depending on the BSD flavor, 8-16partitons in side them in a manor comparable to logical drives.


Same concept from user point of view.

Unless you want to f*** around with things: /boot, /etc, and possibly /bin must be on the / because /boot is needed for bootstrapping. There is probably no sense in moving /sbin off the / either, the space gains not worth the bother unless your back in 1984.


Typical convention is to create either an a and b partition (/ and swap within the slice) or to create several partitions within one or more slices.

this is my OpenBSD systems layout:

Code:
Terry@vectra-$ df -hl
Filesystem     Size    Used   Avail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/wd0a      147M   30.4M    110M    22%    /
/dev/wd0h      393M    938K    372M     0%    /home
/dev/wd0d     98.3M    6.0K   93.4M     0%    /tmp
/dev/wd0g      6.7G    400M    6.0G     6%    /usr
/dev/wd0e      148M   10.6M    130M     8%    /var
/dev/wd1a     11.8G   96.0M   11.1G     1%    /usr/local
/dev/wd1d     44.3G   12.2G   29.9G    29%    /srv
Terry@vectra-$
It functions as a headless file server and without X. The /home partition is small for storing local 'notes' and supported users actual files are stored under /srv/protocol/sharename and mounted over the network on the client system.



(at least modern) BSD systems generally name devices as driver major number [additional information].

i.e. xl0 -> first network interface using 'xl' driver, there is no eth0, eth1, etc -> it's all named by driver.

ad0 -> first pata drive on FreeBSD
da0 -> first scsi/usb drive on FreeBSD

wd0 -> first pata drive on OpenBSD
sd0 -> first sci/usb drive on OpenBSD

etc.


FreeBSDs file system uses soft updates and is gaining journaling support -> soft updates is a different way of filling the same need that journaling does.


Using ext3 under FreeBSD is mounted as ext2 -> and that means mounted without journaling so there is no point in using ext2/ext3 as a FreeBSD system slice.


UFS is better suited for system data.


Use FAT32/EXT2 for data to be shared with other OSes read+write, as ReiserFSv3 and JFS == read only in FreeBSD.
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.

Last edited by TerryP; 17th May 2008 at 06:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2008
lvlamb's Avatar
lvlamb lvlamb is offline
Real Name: Louis V. Lambrecht
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .be
Posts: 221
Thanked 25 Times in 24 Posts
Default

A slice is not exactly a parition.
On Wintel, you have 4 partition, or 3 primary partitions and one "extended" partition chaining logical partitions one to the preceeding one.
A slice in *BSD (and *BSDs habdle this differently) are a "primary" partitions holding several "logical" partitions (called labels).
In one BSD (primary) partition, you house 16 labels. More exactly, 8 OS labels, and 8 "free" hooks to alien labels.
I.e.: the first "alien" label, usually a Windows FAT or NTFS label will be recognized as label "i", the "j", ...
FreeBSD 8 now recognizes 26 labels (as the 26 letters of the alphabet (only limitation), so it can handle non-ufs2/zfs file systems (aka "logical" partitions) from letter "i" to "z" = 18.

So (as "b" is reserved to the swap. "c" descibes the partition volume, "a" is resrved to / root), you can handle 3 partitions with 6 "logical" partitions, plus 18 "logical" partitions.
Reason why these are called slices: 3 slices (holding 6 labels) plus 18 labels.
Or 2 slices (each with 6 labels) and 2 slices each with 18 labels.

Whereas, Wintel only handles "primary" (one partition, one label) and an "extended" partition holding an "unlimited?" number or chaines "logical" partitions.

Clear now?
Clear as mud.
__________________
da more I know I know I know nuttin'
Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2008
wubrgamer's Avatar
wubrgamer wubrgamer is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 34
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

well, i know that in linux, there can be a max of 4 primary partitions...

(i believe that this is a standard limitation of x86 machines...)

now, of those 4 primaries, you can make a logical partition

the logical partition is a primary partition, but is read so as that that partitions WITHIN the logical partition, are unlimited

so, a logical partition can hold several partitions, thus breaking the 4 primary partition limit originally created...
Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2008
lvlamb's Avatar
lvlamb lvlamb is offline
Real Name: Louis V. Lambrecht
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .be
Posts: 221
Thanked 25 Times in 24 Posts
Default

LINUX, Linux Is Not UniX.
Linux follows the Windows/Intel/BIOS scheme with "partitions"
Unices use "slices" which hold "labels".
__________________
da more I know I know I know nuttin'
Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2008
phoenix's Avatar
phoenix phoenix is offline
Risen from the ashes
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 699
Thanked 90 Times in 81 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wubrgamer View Post
So, which BSD's have the most comprehensive support for the ZFS file system?
FreeBSD 7.0 includes experimental support for ZFS version 6.

Pawel is working on ZFS version 10 support in his Perforce branch. Once he completes writing the regressions tests, he will commit it to -CURRENT. Depending on the timeline, it may make it into FreeBSD 8.0. Info on his talk from BSDCan 2008: http://kerneltrap.org/FreeBSD/BSDCan_2008_ZFS_Internals ZFSv10 allows you to use ZFS without a separate / (root) partition.

MacOS X 10.5 includes ZFS support as well.

AFAIK, no other OSes support ZFS.
__________________
Freddie

Help for FreeBSD: Handbook, FAQ, man pages, mailing lists.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2008
phoenix's Avatar
phoenix phoenix is offline
Risen from the ashes
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 699
Thanked 90 Times in 81 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wubrgamer View Post
So, I'm a linux user who wants to play with a serious unix...but doesn't want to have to change very much...
Check out the latest release of OpenSolaris. It's basically Solaris with a Debian-like userland and package manager.

Quote:
like UFS, I'd prefer to stick with JFS or ext3
Pick one or the other. Linux has a tonne of different filesystems (ext2/3/4, ReiserFS, XFS, JFS, etc), while Unix systems have variations on UFS/FFS. Each Unix has thier own version of UFS, optimised to work on the main hardware architecture of the Unix system. (And Solaris now has ZFS.)
__________________
Freddie

Help for FreeBSD: Handbook, FAQ, man pages, mailing lists.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2008
phoenix's Avatar
phoenix phoenix is offline
Risen from the ashes
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 699
Thanked 90 Times in 81 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lvlamb View Post
Say, my typical *BSD slices are:
/ 256MB (FBSD, OBSD 128MB)
/usr 3G
/tmp 512M
/var 512M
I hope you mean "partitions" and not "slices". You really only need 1 slice per disk to install/run/use FreeBSD. You partition each slice as needed. About the only time you need separate slices is if you want to run gmirror on the slices.
__________________
Freddie

Help for FreeBSD: Handbook, FAQ, man pages, mailing lists.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2008
phoenix's Avatar
phoenix phoenix is offline
Risen from the ashes
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 699
Thanked 90 Times in 81 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryP View Post
The slice/partition notation should probably be reversed but I didn't invent the damn thing.
Let's put the blame where it belongs ...

UNIX came out long before DOS. UNIX used slices (of the disk) and partitions (in the slices) long before the PC came out.

Microsoft and IBM butchered things when they released DOS on the first PC.

When BSD was ported to the i386, they brought along the UNIX heritage.

__________________
Freddie

Help for FreeBSD: Handbook, FAQ, man pages, mailing lists.
Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2008
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

True but unfortantly (most of us/) we are stuck on PC's.

Which for me, should we say the PC has quite a bit of a legacy DOS feel to some parts of it's design and implementation when I think about it ;-)


I just prefer how BSD Unix handles the situation, the notation is learnable hehe.
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
Old 25th August 2008
BuSerD's Avatar
BuSerD BuSerD is offline
Real Name: Alejandro
Noob In Training
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 14
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I'm pretty new to the BSDs and Phoenix's explanation of a Slice vs a Partition is the most easy to follow yet technically precise run down. Thanks for passing it on.
Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2008
JMJ_coder JMJ_coder is offline
VPN Cryptographer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 464
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

What is ZFS and why is it better than FFS/UFS?
__________________
And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us. (John 1:14)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
zfs

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2007-2010, the authors
Daemon image copyright ©1988, Marshall Kirk McKusick