Hacker News Reader

> 1PB of ZFS seems scary

Why so?

I meant in one filesystem. No obvious way to construct a single zpool anywhere near that big.

And if not one filesystem, curious how it would work in practice.

We currently allow 1.1 PB in a single "namespace" (zpool).

There are non-obvious ways to make a petabyte-sized zpool non-scary ... but even with those employed we still utilize raidz3 and have contingencies for rollbacks.

edit: for obvious reasons, that 1.1 PB number will grow by 50% in the very near future...

It's easy enough to jam enough disks into a rack with these 90disk 4u super micro jbods. The thing that always scared me (ESP with rsync) is how do you get performant metadata for a few billion files? Or even tens of millions.

And raidz3 resilver must be horrible at those densities!

Again. Just curious. Email at jmancuso@expandrive if you feel like chatting. I know we offer a similar product, but we are about to leave zfs for the above concerns. Wouldn't mind sending some business your way.

Any hints at what filesystem you are moving Strongspace over to? Assuming that you will be moving off SmartOS as well?

Distributed object storage

Filesystem: ExpanDrive :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com