In the aforementioned (previous post of mine) retrospect, hopefully this results in iX perhaps changing some QA parameters for future SCALE releases. Presumably, there’s a handful of iX machines that are reserved for QA use, so perhaps changing the setup on some of those to reflect how things are done on DIY/Generic SCALE systems would help to avoid this in the future.
I get only wanting to do first-party testing on hardware and software combinations that iX actually sells, but if I had to guess I’d say the vast majority of SCALE’s userbase is on DIY/Generic systems, so how those are setup and run/maintained should ultimately be accounted for as part of the QA or validation process.
Alternatively, align SCALE’s minimum/recommended specs to match those of hardware that iX can reliably ensure performance on (this would have ultimately meant the responsibility for this issue still fell on iX QA as there wouldn’t have been a scenario where adequate RAM wasn’t available to the system, since ZFS appeared to just be using all available system RAM minus 1GB), or (hot take) drop DIY/Generic SCALE support or branch it out to “SCALE for DIY” if it’s simply too much work for iX to validate against.