![]() ![]() I still have one issue, exclusively with ProTools wiping labels off its own sessions files (a really small issue, indeed, considering that all the other softwares I've tried aren't doing so). Nevertheless, there are things to know before jumping in: it still doesn't support OSX permissions. Once it's all set up, you can just use ZFS partitions as any other (you can even manage them with Carbon Copy Cloner - not Superduper!). To conclude in a positive way, I must say that after ten months or so on ZFS, I had no issue at all regarding data security: mine were compatibility issues with specific softwares (indeed AVID ProTools and their interface drivers). )Įven if I understand the overflow they must face, that behavior put off my enthusiasm (to say the least.), especially because earlier this year I faced "real" issues that have been fixed thanks to the time I've spent trying fixes and communicating with the team - so I don't recognize myself in the portrait of "stupid user" thrown at me. So, I suppose it means that if you dive into ZFS, you have to be tech savvy enough to be sure that your issues are general issues. Then "You have to realize that there are only 3 of us running this project, it costs you nothing to use the software, so we feel quite justified in dictating in what form we will attempt to deliver support." There are people out there who believe the software cannot be installed because you, and I mean specifically you cannot do so due to whatever circumstances you find yourself in." So, if you absolutely need ZFS or are of the geek kind (like me -) ), go for it, but now that APFS is here, there's no need for ZFS for the average user.Ī quick note after recent changes in their support policy: I had a mail from one of the devs saying "We have reached a point of overload in terms of supporting people with issues such as yours in the forums, and they have reached a point of disarray, bordering on disinformation. Well, I'm probably not the target for ZFS, after all, even though I can't update to MacOS 10.13 and enjoy APFS. But having a few pools scattered amongst HFS+ partitions like me is probably showing issues that wouldn't arise otherwise - and this is an issue for me, as ZFS is still not bootable, AFAIK. I want to believe that if you dedicate a full disk to one big ZFS pool, you'll meet zero issue. Luckily, the issues have always been non-destructive, and once you've got a version that works it's ok. ![]() I had to skip a few versions last year before they fixed an important issue I had (took one and a half year before I can update with peace of mind.) - I don't even dare posting issues on their forum any more, as one dev has been pretty rude to me a few years ago, with no reason (see one of my posts below) and I generally get no answer. Not that ZFS has become a bad filesystem, but the development of the Mac port is really slow in fixing the issues, the devs don't have much time to dedicate to that project and you must make enough trials before updating to a new version. All in all, knowing how it has evolved, I kind of regret a bit my installing it. ![]() Time for a small review.Īfter nearly 4 years using OpenZFS, my early enthusiasm has waned. To end on a positive note, I still recommend it for reliable backups but better forget any kind of acrobatics. :-D The point with OpenZFS on OS X is that there's only one very busy dev working on it, so development is understandably going at a crawl and some issues are not fixed, especially if they happen on old versions of MacOS. While restructuring my drives, I also had lightning KP where the computer reboots abruptly when copying huge folders or sparsebundles using the Finder, and no trace of anything in the Console! :-o Using apps like Carbon Copy Cloner or Terminal (with the ditto command) works perfectly, so it's very likely that Finder is the culprit here, as it has proved many times not being the most reliable piece of software in history. There are issues, though, even if they are perhaps not directly attributable to OpenZFS, but I often had crashes where zfs kexts are in the backtrace, in recent versions at least. Sure enough, ZFS is still a great and secure filesystem and a reliable choice if you value your data more than speed. When I read my old reviews here, it's clear that it has become a lot slower and is not suited for daily personal computer use (putting your /Users on a zpool and things like that). ![]() the way it's meant to be, not slices scattered on one or more drives, even if it's possible and I've used it that way until now. After 6+ years using OpenZFS on OS X, I've just finished restructuring my drives, only keeping ZFS for long time backups on a single zpool - i.e. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |