Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Apple hardware/software and related topics.
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
Geoman
Donor
Donor
Posts: 825
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 3:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany
Contact:

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby Geoman » Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:45 pm

josehill wrote:But, yeah, I'd love to have the 10.6 user experience with 10.9's "invisible" improvements.


Considering what you both Gardian & Josehill wrote, I take backe my 'under the hood statement'.

And for me Windows user I'd love to have the Windows 7 user experience with 8.1 "invisible" improvements. ;)
:Indy: :O2: :O2: :Indigo: :Indigo2IMP: :Octane: :Octane2: :Octane2:
SGI - the legend will never die!!

User avatar
noth
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: Lausanne

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby noth » Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:00 pm

guardian452 wrote:I wonder if the disk subsystems in a 2006 mac pro is up to a 3-disk raidz with 3 or 4tb disks. I think this configuration would be ideal for my needs. I am only concerned because I know they sold some sort of RAID controller plug-in board to take over from the built in disk controller. And application compatibility is also a concern... I already use aperture, itunes, an xboxy-sharing service I use called connect360... time machine would be a bonus. MacZFS doesn't like USB disks but what's their opinion of firewire? esata is almost a non-starter as OSX doesn't support hot-plugging.

The PCI-e SSDs are nice-looking. One of those would make a good system disk. A 3-disk raidz for working files and storage, some sort of external backup that doesn't need to be super fancy but if it's automated with TM it would be a blessing... and one disk sled spare as I like to keep a windows VM on it's own disk.


Amazing how one faulty disk turns even me into a storage nerd :shock: ZFS seems overkill on a root disk which in my case is barely ~70GB and doesn't grow much. Super easy to backup and restore.



Looking at the FAQ for the MacZFS project, it seems that to get Time Machine to cooperate you need to export the ZFS volume with netatalk and then create a sparse drive on the network drive... or there's TimeMachine-ZFS, commandline but it seems to do the job. I've not tried any of this, but I imagine that if you need to use USB or e-sata then you eject the pool, then the drive. You, won't be able to use ZFS as the root drive for OS X though, at least not for what's needed to boot the OS from what I read. For a workstation, ZFS seems to bring too many benefits to be ignored, especially with atomic writes.

User avatar
josehill
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3334
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 9:53 pm
Location: New England, USA
Contact:

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby josehill » Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:22 pm

Geoman wrote:And for me Windows user I'd love to have the Windows 7 user experience with 8.1 "invisible" improvements. ;)

Exactly! I was thinking the same thing about Windows when I wrote my comment about 10.6. (Some of the visible Mac changes had me thinking about using Windows more often, but then MS released Win8, so now I've shifted work to a notebook. Made of paper.)

I also agree with your remark about filesystems - "As for filesystems, I don't trust any of them - all the important stuff is on a RAID 10 + scheduled backups." ;)

Considering what you both Gardian & Josehill wrote, I take backe my 'under the hood statement'.

You're a gentleman to say that, Geoman. On balance, it is debatable just how important those "under the hood" improvements really are if their impact is not widely felt, so I do see your original point. The old "If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it" story. Time will tell.

User avatar
me4twb
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:52 am

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby me4twb » Tue Mar 11, 2014 5:27 pm

recently I sat in front of a new Macintosh of a friend and I did not find the scrollbar! They appear only if one scrolls :lol:

Yeah I've had that problem on 10.7, I'm not a mac pro by any means so I found that annoying.

I've had file loss on ext3 and jfs both on archlinux. I've had a few messed up files on xfs too, though that might have been crash / powerloss induced.

My solution has been to maintain 3 copies of my data:
1) on my direct attached storage on my main pc, which is now open indiana on zfs root.
2) On a synology NAS raid-5 with 4x 3tb hdd
3) On another synology NAS raid-5 with 4x 3tb hdd

And I just copy the data across once a week onto one and then the other, the synology budget nas are just a slow low power arm-cpu linux box that you can ssh into. So I have 1 week and 2 week online backup. They are very slow they it is quite laggy to do anything with them, and torrent hashing overtaxes the CPU to the point that it is painful to get a directory listing from them over CIFS.

But if a file gets corrupted it would overwrite the old copy and corruption would creep into the backups.

Maybe I could have a cronjob create a list of all files along with their md4 hashes and then diff them between both the online backups, and email that to my email account to read during a slow hour or two at work or something.

User avatar
guardian452
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby guardian452 » Tue Mar 11, 2014 6:28 pm

josehill wrote:
guardian452 wrote:But if there was going to be a Right Time, it would have been with release 10.6... Better late than never, tho I suspect they are working on their own improved FS more suitable for their users.

I suppose, though the 10.6 was a really big refinement and consolidation of the platform. It was even billed as having minimal new end user-visible features, with nearly all of the improvement either under the hood or targeted at developers. I look at it as the "reference release" for Intel Macs, with 10.9 becoming (perhaps) the next "reference release." It took around four years to get from 10.6 to 10.9's under-the-hood improvements. I can't imagine it would've been possible to get that far at the time 10.6 was released, though I agree that the market would have raved about those improvements, if they would have been deliverable. As it was, it was probably a big enough effort just to get a fully Cocoa'd Finder built and tested.

But, yeah, I'd love to have the 10.6 user experience with 10.9's "invisible" improvements.

10.9 is a natural evolution focused on performance, what I meant was if they were going to swith to zfs 10.6 would have been a good time since there were so many other changes. All at once. Like ripping off a band aid. Probably not a good idea :) I expect a better filesystem, hopefully simpler than zfs or zfs made nice in an 'apple-y' sort of way. I know apple did a lot of work on zfs (around the time when 10.5/10.6 was current) before canning the project, hopefully the trend of a new release every year still allows for big projects like this.

And I'm sorry to say, you have to look hard to see any difference at all between the past 3 releases. They've slowly been draining out the color from the icons and etc but it seems consistent to me...

User avatar
hamei
Posts: 10435
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby hamei » Tue Mar 11, 2014 7:13 pm

guardian452 wrote:[... hopefully simpler than zfs or zfs made nice in an 'apple-y' sort of way.

ZFS is about as simple as it gets for filesystem maintenance. The descriptions are a chaotic mess but actually running the thing, that's simplicity itself.

Better documentation needed ;)
I spent a fortune on booze, birds, and fast cars ... the rest I just squandered

User avatar
recondas
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5441
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 5:55 pm
Location: NC - USA

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby recondas » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:36 am

guardian452 wrote:Yes, this is on a 2006 mac pro with 10.9.2 with a modified boot.efi. Yes, it is an unsupported configuration. No, I don't care (as it works fine otherwise).


@guardian452 - If you're willing I'd love to hear more on your experiences with that process.
***********************************************************************
Welcome to ARMLand - 0/0x0d00
running...(sherwood-root 0607201829)
* InfiniteReality/Reality Software, IRIX 6.5 Release *
***********************************************************************

User avatar
guardian452
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby guardian452 » Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:36 am

There is a modified boot.efi that basically provides a 64-32 thunking layer for efi system calls so nvram and etc commands still work fine. I was looking to do this for a while but I didn't want to pay for the bandwidth to download a 6GB OSX installer file over the cell network, so I had to wait until I had real internet again.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread. ... 176&page=2

But wait! It gets better! Somebody has built a script to make a suitable installer that pulls your board-id, the .efi, the OSX installer, everything you need, and puts it onto a USB drive to boot from. Automatically! I did this with 10.9.2 a bit over a week ago onto a spare 160gb hard disk so I still have my 10.6 install in case something goes wrong. It was super easy. The utility is named sixty-for on thirty-two or SFOTT. Which makes perfect sense :lol: It will supposedly also work with mountain lion but I don't know any advantage to running that over Mavericks.

http://oemden.com/?page_id=531

Of course, I would still disable automatic OS updates, but other than that, it's probably as seamless as it's ever going to get. You need a suitable graphics card upgrade (I have an Apple Radeon 5770 1gb) as mavericks doesn't support the original 7300gt. I also have upgraded the processors (lots of info about that out there...) and 10gb of memory (what the machine came with), but mavericks also runs well on my MBA with 1.4 c2d and 2gb ram (more sluggish than 10.6, but it never gets 'hung up' or especially slow and battery life is still as good as 10.6, I don't use it for very heavy-duty programs..)

Far, far, superior to running OSX in vmware fusion. And your 8-years-old machine can be up to date once more! Sleep works, hardwaremonitor.app can see all the fans and temperatures, sound works, icloud works. The whole shebang.


As for the disk situation, right now I am using my backup firewire disk. I'm planning to purchase a trio of 2 or 3 tb (or 4tb, didn't know they even came that big! ...if they will work on my 'pooter) disks and doing the zfs raidz thing on them. So what I have to do is not crash my backup disk before then ;)

ZFS is about as simple as it gets for filesystem maintenance. The descriptions are a chaotic mess but actually running the thing, that's simplicity itself.

Better documentation needed ;)
My problem is the people who use and recommend ZFS are the sort of people that like making things difficult. You're right, there's not much to do with it and all that would be necessary would be another tab in diskutility. But the sort of people that say ZFS is great are also the people that like to recompile linux kernels for fun, so I've always been a bit too much leery of it :mrgreen:

User avatar
recondas
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5441
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 5:55 pm
Location: NC - USA

Re: Strike up one more for OSX getting a new filesystem

Unread postby recondas » Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:18 am

Thanks for the write up guardian452!
***********************************************************************
Welcome to ARMLand - 0/0x0d00
running...(sherwood-root 0607201829)
* InfiniteReality/Reality Software, IRIX 6.5 Release *
***********************************************************************


Return to “Apple”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest