OpenZFS 2.2 released! Here we go...!

[Davvo]

@Davvo, not you too, right? You're still cool with The Core? Right? Right...?

Still running TrueNAS CORE, don't see much reason to hop onto SCALE yet.

SCALE tends to be the "first out of the gate" and CORE gets the features after a solid degree of testing.

As long as stability is not used as a justification for not adding features (like a fixed WebUI shell ) and we [CORE users] eventually get it, personally I'm absolutely fine with tons of testing and long times.
Not talking about big ones like dRAID, but arc fixing totally yes.

 

[winnielinnie]

As long as stability is not used as a justification for not adding features (like a fixed WebUI shell ) and we [CORE users] eventually get it

Core user: "The TrueNAS logo is upside-down on the dashboard. Can you fix it?"

iXsystems: "Good catch! Fixed in SCALE!"

Core user: "But what about Cor-"

iXsystems: "THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BREAK THE PRODUCT AND DESTROY MISSION-CRITICAL DATA. WE CANNOT RISK THIS FOR OUR ENTERPRISE CUSTOMERS."



Please don't hurt me. I'm only teasing.

 

[Patrick M. Hausen]

Every bug has the potential to become critical to somebody's workflow:

Workflow

www.xkcd.com

 

[Etorix]

As long as stability is not used as a justification for not adding features (like a fixed WebUI shell )

So far it's not used in this way. The Web shell consistently sucks in both CORE and SCALE.

 

[Davvo]

So far it's not used in this way. The Web shell consistently sucks in both CORE and SCALE.

I remember being told it was fixed in SCALE, at least the copy-paste thing?

 

[winnielinnie]

I remember being told it was fixed in SCALE

You are indeed correct.

It was fixed in SCALE, but not in Core.

[NAS-104469] - iXsystems TrueNAS Jira

ixsystems.atlassian.net

[NAS-120262] - iXsystems TrueNAS Jira

ixsystems.atlassian.net

So far it's not used in this way. The Web shell consistently sucks in both CORE and SCALE.

But it "sucks less" in SCALE.



Anyways. Since OpenZFS 2.2 will be landing in TrueNAS Core 13.1, my "angry rage meter" went down from 86 to 62.

(I ate a dark-chocolate bar with roasted almonds this morning, so today my rage level is at a comfortable 48.)



Rage-o-Meter™ v1.26-rc4

100
.
.
.
75
.
.
.
50
.
48 <--- @winnielinnie on October 17, 2023
.
.
.
25
.
.
.
0

 

[Davvo]

It's actually amazing that Fast Dedup will already be in ZFS 2.3

 

[winnielinnie]

It's actually amazing that Fast Dedup will already be in ZFS 2.3

90% of new TrueNAS users in 2025...

Total post count: 1

Joined: today

First topic: "I created my first pool and immediately enabled dedup. I watched a YouTube video where he said something about how 'fast' dedup is now available on TrueNAS. But my write performance to my RAIDZ1 seems kind of slow??? I added a special vdev SanDisk™ SSD for my DDT... but it didn't help much!! (I found it in one of my pencil drawers in my old writing desk.) Should I buy an NVMe to add a SLOG??? Can I partition an NVMe for one half to hold my fast dedup tables and the other half to hold my SLOG???"

 

[Volts]

CORE nightlies have been ZFS 2.2.0-rc4 for a while.

Code:

root@truenas[~]# uname -a
FreeBSD truenas.local 13.2-RELEASE-p3 FreeBSD 13.2-RELEASE-p3 truenas/13.1-stable-5f730f43aa3 TRUENAS amd64
root@truenas[~]# zfs -V
zfs-2.2.0-rc4
zfs-kmod-v2023100200-zfs_fe88aff9e

 

[Whattteva]

• BLAKE3 (will it be an available option in the "CHECKSUM" drop-down list?)
• "Corrective receives" (will it be available as an option in the Replication Tasks page?)
• "Quick scrubs" (will it be available in the Pool actions page?)

Corrective receives and quick scrubs pique my interest. How are they different from the regular receive and scrub?

 

[winnielinnie]

Corrective receives and quick scrubs pique my interest. How are they different from the regular receive and scrub?

Quick scrubs can be issued (with the "-e" flag) after you've completed a full pass with a normal scrub. Only the "errors" in the pool's log (which point to particular data) will be re-read, inspected, and attempt a repair. This saves time for those of us who need only to run a scrub again (after bumping into an issue), whether to re-attempt a repair or clear a previous stagnant error.



Corrective receives (with the "-c" flag) work similar to an incremental zfs send. The difference is that they only attempt to transfer blocks to repair corruption on the destination. So only the blocks in question need to be transferred. (Only works on data blocks at the moment; not metadata.)

For example, say you have a source pool and a backup pool. After some time, the backup pool has a file or two corrupt. Maybe it lacks redundancy or it's unable to repair itself. The source pool, however, still has known good copies of these specific blocks.

Without having to destroy anything or start all over again, you can send a "corrective receive" to the backup pool, in which it will send good copies of those blocks from the source pool. (Correcting it "in-place" at the block-level.)


* I could be misinterpreting "corrective receives", in that it might work as a standard replication, with the added feature of attempting a repair using the source's known good data. (It's not clear if invoking "-c" will only transfer good blocks to replace corrupted ones; or if it will still transfer the entire snapshot/delta again.)

 

[Davvo]

CORE nightlies have been ZFS 2.2.0-rc4 for a while.

I'm not that much of a power user... yet.

 

[Volts]

Boot snapshots and trivial rollback mean I'm fearless!

But also I watch github and it's mostly periodic alignment with FreeBSD, keeping up with ZFS/Samba upstream, and sometimes local iX patches to ZFS/Samba. There isn't much scary going on in TrueNAS CORE Nightlies.

 

[Davvo]

But also I watch github and it's mostly periodic alignment with FreeBSD, keeping up with ZFS/Samba upstream, and sometimes local iX patches to ZFS/Samba. There isn't much scary going on in TrueNAS CORE Nightlies.

Makes sense since they want to keep CORE stable; I am tempted now.

 

[Patrick M. Hausen]

CORE nightlies have been ZFS 2.2.0-rc4 for a while.

That's awesome and comes as total surprise to me! Because that is not in stock FreeBSD 13.2. If I was to build an appliance I would upstream *everything* but it seems like iX like to cherry-pick and maintain their own branches.

 

[Whattteva]

That's awesome and comes as total surprise to me! Because that is not in stock FreeBSD 13.2. If I was to build an appliance I would upstream *everything* but it seems like iX like to cherry-pick and maintain their own branches.

Probably cause they don't plan to backport it to 13.2 and instead will debut it in 14.0, which is gearing up for release soon (14.0-RC2 happening in 3 days).

 

[Patrick M. Hausen]

Probably cause they don't plan to backport it to 13.2 and instead will debut it in 14.0, which is gearing up for release soon.

It is in 14.0 already. My point is that I am surprised iX backported it to 13.2 ...

 

[Volts]

It is in 14.0 already. My point is that I am surprised iX backported it to 13.2 ...

I don't think it's a big backport. I think they're keeping their local OpenZFS port updated and using it instead of the version included in FreeBSD base.

I kinda had the same thought, but I'm not expecting TrueNAS to update FreeBSD itself in the near future. That's a big change for a "stable" platform.

On the other hand, there's a lot of really good stuff in recent OpenZFS. That's very high value, and TrueNAS participates in ZFS development so they're familiar with it.

 

[Davvo]

Thank you iX for being honest about not abandoning CORE!

 

[Whattteva]

Thank you iX for being honest about not abandoning CORE!

Actions speak louder than words after all.