[zfs-discuss] Stable ZFS releases

Andreas Dilger adilger at dilger.ca
Tue Apr 10 18:20:45 EDT 2018

On Apr 10, 2018, at 12:48 PM, Gordan Bobic <zfs-discuss at list.zfsonlinux.org> wrote:
> The thing you need to consider is that there are a lot of known bugs that have been fixed since 0.6.x.

This is definitely worthwhile to emphasize again.  Also, this issue was
mostly prevalent (though not stictly limited to) to older "cp" utilities
that copied files in a specific order, so it didn't show up for the
developers during normal testing.

There are always going to be bugs in code, and having a hard rule about
sticking to older or newer releases is never going to be right in all
conditions.  Staying away from the bleeding edge is usually safe, but
you still need to test for your workload to see if it works for you.

That said, it also helps everyone if users report any problems back to the
developers promptly, rather than quietly saying to yourself "this version
doesn't work for me" and going back to the old one.  Vladimir reported the
original #7401 problem to the list on April 5, and after some debugging on
this list a problem was opened in Github.  Thanks investigation by a number
of people on the Github issue over the weekend, the problem was isolated
to a specific patch (which itself was fixing a different problem), the
patch was reverted, and fixes have already been proposed.

I don't think you can really ask for better behaviour than this.  It is
unlikely that a large number of people were seriously affected by this
bug, and with the quick release of 0.7.8 there should be little additional
fallout from this specific issue.

Cheers, Andreas

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> this recent regression [1] make me wonder what ZoL relase to use for maximum stability and data safety.
>> I generally do some in-lab testing of the packaged RHEL/CentOS version and, if all *seems* to work fine, I push it on production machines. The key word here is "seems": some bug require extensive testing, and it is entirely possible that for them to pass my lab testing.
>> I noticed that Ubuntu and Debian provide the latest 0.6.x release in their repositories.
>> What ZoL relase are you running on production machine? Should I restrict myself to 0.6.x releases?
>> Thanks.
>> [1] https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/issues/7401

Cheers, Andreas

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 873 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://list.zfsonlinux.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20180410/7ec1b7cc/attachment.sig>

More information about the zfs-discuss mailing list