Hello! I was hoping to maybe just start some discussion around the default storage driver that is presented when one does lxd init
out of the gate, which is zfs. I assume that this choice was done because it’s generally “optimized” and doesn’t require extra hardware or configuration to setup, which I can understand. However, in my (and others’) testing, this storage driver is slow when one runs their first lxc
command after (re)booting a system - sometimes taking as many as 10+ seconds to get command output. After that, however, it’s fine. Since this behavior was similar to how snaps used to be very slow to start initially, it was just being chalked up to that. That said, that issue with snaps has been worked on pretty extensively [link][link] (not with lxd specifically, but more generally), so after some testing with other storage drivers, we found that zfs was actually what was causing lxd to be so slow initially.
Since this tends to give off a bad impression of both snaps and lxd in general for both newcomers and regular users (reinforcing notions of poor performance), I’m wondering if it might be worth considering to set the default storage driver to dir? I understand that it’s pretty basic when compared to other drivers, but I might argue that’s sort of the point of a quickstart setup - low bar to entry, minimal fuss. Indeed, if one runs out of space on their default zfs pool (which is pretty small), they’re required to research how to expand it, whereas with dir it’s directly related to their partitions available disk space - easy to understand, easy to relate to their system, easy to interact with. lxd is quick out of the gate with dir, shedding the impression that either lxd or the snap ecosystem is to blame for that initial slowness. If folks need more advanced storage usage, they’ll be reading the docs anyway and can choose the driver that best suites their needs.
Thoughts?