TrueNAS CORE Vs TrueNAS SCALE

Out of interest to the community would iX share the percentage of their Enterprise customers that currently use CORE vs SCALE?

Feel free to like this post if you’d be interested in an answer.

3 Likes

Its a useful question.

For the Community… SCALE is about the same number of users as CORE 13.0. It will be larger in Q3.

For the Enterprise: Most mature product users are on 13.x still. X-Series, M-Series. We are only recommending migration for these if there are specific features needed. This will change with 24.4.2 and 24.04.3 There are now equivalent stability, extra performance and extra security. To make this switch, there are a few minutes of downtime, so we don’t make the switch without planning it.

For new products: F-Series, H-Series, they are all on the 24.04 version.

So, in terms of new deployments for Enterprise customers it will be about 50/50 in 2H 2024.

I’d expect the crossover in terms of total volume of Enterprise users in 2025.

3 Likes

I should add that TrueNAS 13.3 will be an update from 13.0 that doesn’t require any planned downtime for HA systems. Failover from one controller to another can be done while keeping VMs and other applications working. There is just a stall in I/O during the failover.

For conservative or mission-critical users this 13.3 update may take them well into 2026 and beyond. This update minimizes risk and downtime and requires no retraining for the existing WebUI. It still gets the benefits of OpenZFS 2.2. So, we don’t expect a rapid migration to SCALE.

1 Like

Network: FreeBSD consistently out preforms Linux (Debian) without tuning (with tuning Linux can typically match). Are you guys preforming those tunings to get the same network performance on SCALE for the enterprise users? Also, were you making network tunings to COREs kernel? I am on the thought-track of “FreeBSD is typically the choice in low-latency, high consistency, high secure network applications”; are there benchmarks given to enterprise customers showing kernel tunings to match CORE? And/or are they giving any feedback about any benchmarks they’ve done? Generally speaking, of course.

Yes, of course we tune for each OS and platform. It takes time to test and get it right.

Dragonfish is significantly outperforming 13.0, but we also expect 13.3 to be improved.
Blog here: TrueNAS Dragonfish Performance Breathes Fire

This chart shows the difference with our M50 platform:

1 Like

Nice but that comparison is a little one-sided don’t you think? I mean your testing older against newer and newest (discrepancies are expected). What I take is that my very much older FreeBSD can hold its own against the newest Linux Kernels (-i.e. shouldn’t it be 13 v Bluefin?). At any rate, thanks.

Its Current CORE vs SCALE… as indicated, we expect CORE 13.3 to be a bit faster.

However, most of the performance improvements seem to be in the OpenZFS and protocol stacks… not the underlying OS.