On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

August 28th, 2009

Apple kicks ZFS in the butt

Posted by Robin Harris @ 9:02 pm

Categories: RAID, Software

Tags: File System, Apple Inc., Sun-developed ZFS, ZFS, Robin Harris

It’s official: ZFS - a kick-butt file system - is nowhere to be seen in the latest release of Mac OS X, Snow Leopard. Even though it appeared in 10.5 Server, and was expected to become the default file system at some point, Apple has abandoned the Sun-developed ZFS, the first 21st century file system.

A bummer for anyone who stores data on their computer.

Why should I care?
Apple is hoping you don’t - and they’re probably right. None of the mainstream press have mentioned dropped feature, even though it is right up there with parallel processing support as a winner for users.

ZFS combines a file system and a volume manager, along with some cool architectural features, to create an easily managed and highly reliable file system. Advanced features that just work.

Some cool features.

  • Manage storage, not disks. You can put all your disks in a pool and specify the redundancy level. ZFS takes care of the rest.
  • No more silent data corruption.Wonky things can happen to your data to and from a disk. ZFS checksums every file before it is written and stores the checksum on the parent. When the file is read, the checksum tells the filesystem if that is the block it wrote.
  • Easy snapshots. Ever wish you could roll back to a known good state? Snapshots make that easy and ZFS makes snapshots easy.
  • High performance software RAID built-in. Worried about protecting your data. ZFS provides strong RAID capabilities without adding hardware.
  • Transparent compression on the fly. Save capacity by compressing old and/or large files automagically.

What happened?
2 years ago it looked like ZFS was locked in to Snow Leopard. The Apple team was working with the Sun ZFS team. It was enabled as a read-only file system on 10.5 server. Apple even freakin’ announced ZFS on Snow Leopard. The advantages - to storage geeks - were obvious.

Plus the opportunity to put daylight between OS X and Windows 7. Microsoft’s ambitions for something called WinFS crashed to earth 3 years ago (see Bring me the head of WinFS.

But Apple started walking back ZFS about 9 months ago. Newer builds of Snow Leopard had less and less ZFS content until today’s official release - which has none.

Maybe some insight will emerge from secretive Apple, but don’t count on it. Removing ZFS from the server edition, where it makes even more obvious sense, suggests it is gone for good.

What did it in? Maybe it was a schedule problem - file systems require a lot of testing - and rewriting all the other bits took precedence. NIH - Not Invented Here - syndrome is another possibility. Or perhaps the uncertainty of Sun’s future led Apple to pull back.

Or maybe they just decided customers wouldn’t know enough to care, so why bother? Whatever the reason it is a major step backwards for the PC industry.

The Storage Bits take
File systems are essential but unsexy plumbing. Whether it’s a missing or corrupted file or a system slowing to a crawl because the directory is bloated, there is no error message that says “Your FS is screwed up.”

And as noted in How Microsoft puts your data at risk - which indicted Apple’s HFS+ as well -

. . . more than half of all data loss is caused by system and hardware problems. A high quality file system that took better care of our data could eliminate many of those failures.

The industry knows how to fix the problems. The question is when. With a resurgent Mac pushing ZFS maybe Redmond will see the light sooner, rather than later, and dramatically increase the reliability of all our systems.

With Apple’s retreat from ZFS everyone who uses a personal computer is the loser. Maybe the Microsoft team working to improve NTFS will now take the lead in file system quality and feature.

Comments welcome, of course. Update: I got some more theories over the weekend on why the ZFS deal fell through. Check them out on StorageMojo. The short answer: licensing; GPL vs CDDL. End update.

Robin HarrisRobin Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.


Email Robin Harris

Subscribe to Storage Bits via Email alerts or RSS.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 45 Talkback(s)
Disks already do ECC natively
Disks already natively do ECC on a block-by-block basis, and correct several bits and detect errors in even more bits. They have been doing this in one form or another since at least the early '80s, e... (Read the rest)
Posted by: zackers Posted on: 10/06/09 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Curious  honeymonster | 08/29/09
ZFS is a decade ahead of NTFS, even with updates  914four | 09/09/09
Disks already do ECC natively  zackers | 10/06/09
Thank you Robin Harris, for giving Windows folks some ammunition.  Solid Jedi Knight | 08/29/09
I think it was the Oracle thing.  No More Microsoft Software Ever! | 08/29/09
I agree  914four | 09/09/09
Or Maybe...  wolf_z | 08/29/09
ZFS is in large scale production now  Robin HarrisZDNet Moderator | 08/29/09
And FAT32 and NTFS are still in production  John Zern | 08/29/09
Who owns Sun Microsystems now?  UsernameRequired | 08/30/09
Licensing Problem?  aj.redmond@... | 09/01/09
Aren't Steve and Larry tight?  matthew_maurice | 08/30/09
RE: Apple kicks ZFS in the butt  rickdees@... | 08/29/09
Does it makes sense for an "install in place" OS?  jeremychappell | 08/29/09
LOL, check out this previous post on ZDNet  Qbt | 08/29/09
Are you suggesting Microsoft would have dumped ZFS too?  No More Microsoft Software Ever! | 08/29/09
LOL, no  Qbt | 08/30/09
Ext4 file system is why.  progon | 08/29/09
err..Ext4 is not an OS (NT)  No More Microsoft Software Ever! | 08/29/09
ext4 is nothing like ZFS, btrfs is though.  B.O.F.H. | 08/29/09
Still prefer Ubuntu to OSX  root12 | 08/30/09
Sorry, but that's wrong.  914four | 09/09/09
What a difference a year makes.. (kick-butt-kick)  dszimmer | 08/29/09
RE: Apple kicks ZFS in the butt  my.subscriptions@... | 08/29/09
That would be my guess as well  914four | 09/09/09
ZFS comes at a huge cost  boxmonkey | 08/30/09
good point  fredericr | 08/30/09
Perf costs of ZFS. Sounds like a great article to write, Robin!  quux | 08/30/09
You can probably improve the performance of your array...  914four | 09/09/09
RE: Apple kicks ZFS in the butt  UsernameRequired | 08/30/09
It got Steved because Jonathan broke the news early  harrib | 08/30/09
Are you suggesting Apple consumers are paying for Jobs' hurt pride?  NonZealot | 08/30/09
ORACLE BOUGHT SUN. ZFS IS DEAD.  darthstupid | 08/30/09
Something about ease of use and the experience  mlindl | 08/31/09
Good for you!  bmgoodman | 08/31/09
Ah yes, I remember the WinFS bashing  8string | 08/31/09
Ah, but did the author of ZFS butt-kicking harp on Microsoft?  HypnoToad72 | 08/31/09
RE: Apple kicks ZFS in the butt  cabdriverjim | 08/31/09
BugID?  Burana | 08/31/09
Fair enough. Vista was hyped as having WinFS and it was dropped...  HypnoToad72 | 08/31/09
Just do a search on ZDNet for "WinFS". Plenty of bashing back then...  Qbt | 08/31/09
There is a fair bit of difference between...  zkiwi | 08/31/09
RE: Apple kicks ZFS in the butt  sheepguy42 | 08/31/09
RE: Apple kicks ZFS in the butt  Douglas Ward | 09/02/09
Sun, Apple, ZFS, LustreFS, Zones/Jails  z3r0_f4ct0r | 09/03/09

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Click Here
advertisement

Recent Entries

advertisement

Archives

Favorite Links

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here