Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ZFS File-System On Linux Moves Along

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ZFS File-System On Linux Moves Along

    Phoronix: ZFS File-System On Linux Moves Along

    A new release of the native ZFS file-system module implementation for the Linux kernel (not the FUSE-based ZFS) has been released by the team at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE2MTc

  • #2
    Quick question:
    Sun released version 28 under CDDL, so people can use it. Oracle is now at 30+, which has encryption and stuff, will those features ever be released to the public or are we stuck with version 28? Will there be any kind of fork to develope parallel to Oracle?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by disi View Post
      Quick question:
      Sun released version 28 under CDDL, so people can use it. Oracle is now at 30+, which has encryption and stuff, will those features ever be released to the public or are we stuck with version 28? Will there be any kind of fork to develope parallel to Oracle?
      i know encryption is planned , tho dont ask for time tho you can use encryption outside the filesystem see http://blog.mthode.org/gentoo-harden...-dm-cryptluks/ at cost of not using the whole disk feature ,which reduces performance a bit .

      i'm running zfs as rootfs for 5 months now and really like it but keep in mind it needs quite some RAM to run smooth

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by disi View Post
        Quick question:
        Sun released version 28 under CDDL, so people can use it. Oracle is now at 30+, which has encryption and stuff, will those features ever be released to the public or are we stuck with version 28? Will there be any kind of fork to develope parallel to Oracle?
        Actually, even FreeBSD ZFS and OpenIndiana ZFS are incompatibles due to parallel developments...

        Comment


        • #5
          ZFS is a losing proposition. The only thing it offers is compatibility with existing ZFS systems for data recovery purposes. Since that will never happen, it would be a lot better to simply forget about it and put all that development resource into enhancing a more viable filesystem, like BTRFS.

          Anything ZFS leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I sure as hell would never use it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
            ZFS is a losing proposition. The only thing it offers is compatibility with existing ZFS systems for data recovery purposes. Since that will never happen, it would be a lot better to simply forget about it and put all that development resource into enhancing a more viable filesystem, like BTRFS.

            Anything ZFS leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I sure as hell would never use it.
            Why not? I've been using it on production systems where I work for years. It's a fine filesystem, and I trust my data on it. I can't (yet) say that about BTRFS.

            The only real problem with it on Linux is a matter of licensing. I've been running a ZFS pool on my home desktop with ZFS-on-Linux for a while and it seems reliable, although I'm not brave enough to deploy it in production yet.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
              ZFS is a losing proposition. The only thing it offers is compatibility with existing ZFS systems for data recovery purposes. Since that will never happen, it would be a lot better to simply forget about it and put all that development resource into enhancing a more viable filesystem, like BTRFS.

              Anything ZFS leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I sure as hell would never use it.
              As one of the people who contributes to ZFSOnLinux development, I can say the same about btrfs.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by disi View Post
                Quick question:
                Sun released version 28 under CDDL, so people can use it. Oracle is now at 30+, which has encryption and stuff, will those features ever be released to the public or are we stuck with version 28? Will there be any kind of fork to develope parallel to Oracle?
                Solaris is now closed so the Oracle development won't be public (well, except when the code gets anonymously dumped on the internet). The Illumos project (OpenIndiana, Nexenta, etc. -- the OpenSolaris forks) will continue development of the public, open Solaris.

                My understanding is that all the original Solaris devs are focusing on Illumos now... and none of them work at Oracle anymore.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Help me please

                  Hello, firsy excuse me for my bad english, i wokr whit googel traductor.

                  I have intallled Linux Mint Debian in first disk and Openindiana ( fork of Solaris ), in second disk.
                  I have installed linux ZFS and SPK on the page http://zfsonlinux.org/, according to the manual:

                  ZFS:
                  $ ./configure
                  $ make pkg

                  To copy the kernel code inside your kernel source tree for builtin
                  compilation:

                  $ ./configure --enable-linux-builtin --with-linux=/usr/src/linux-...
                  $ ./copy-builtin /usr/src/linux-...

                  SPL:
                  The simplest way to compile this package is:

                  1. `cd' to the directory containing the package's source code and type
                  `./configure' to configure the package for your system.

                  Running `configure' might take a while. While running, it prints
                  some messages telling which features it is checking for.

                  2. Type `make' to compile the package.

                  3. Optionally, type `make check' to run any self-tests that come with
                  the package.

                  4. Type `make install' to install the programs and any data files and
                  documentation

                  But my problem no is solucioned, I can't read syetem Openindian from linux.
                  Help me, you know some manual easier? You can read Opensoliaris from Linux?


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ryao View Post
                    As one of the people who contributes to ZFSOnLinux development, I can say the same about btrfs.
                    You see, btrfs has made it to mainline. ZFS will never do that - tell "thanks" to guys from Sun for their strange license. The difference? You can see it at post above my. Btrfs will work by default in many distros. ZFS will not. And it will be PITA to use it. So it about to lose their grounds as btrfs improves (and looking on commits to btrfs I can admin it's quite impressive job).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View Post
                      You see, btrfs has made it to mainline. ZFS will never do that - tell "thanks" to guys from Sun for their strange license. The difference? You can see it at post above my. Btrfs will work by default in many distros. ZFS will not. And it will be PITA to use it. So it about to lose their grounds as btrfs improves (and looking on commits to btrfs I can admin it's quite impressive job).
                      well, it might still be years to go until Btrfs is mature enough for stable & production use

                      for me it still throws errors and loses/screws data

                      until then I'll gladly use ZFSonLinux which is getting better and better (and faster, too!) btw


                      don't get me wrong: I'd really like to use Btrfs due to ease of accessibility over ZFS but my data integrity and presence currently is more important than using a filesystem whose fsck doesn't do too much yet and can be overwhelmed by suspending the computer/laptop and through syncing the portage-tree and thus losing complete access to the data ...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by OpenSLOWlaris
                        As a matter of fact all most all pieces of software that could not be incorporated with Linux lose on to ones that were able to.

                        Can all you guys see the lesson here?
                        Yeah, I really see NTFS-3G or the Nvidia and AMD blobs losing. Oh, wait ...

                        But anyways, why should anyone hear what a person has to say that openly accuses the OpenBSD developers of being murderers and terrorists? You have lost that little bit of credibility that you had, now go away troll.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by OpenSLOWlaris
                          0xBADCODE gives a great point, ZFS is dead because of it's ridiculous license while BTRFS with proliferate because of the GPL and that it can be incorporated into Linux.

                          As a matter of fact all most all pieces of software that could not be incorporated with Linux lose on to ones that were able to.

                          Can all you guys see the lesson here?
                          That it takes ten years to write a filesystem for Linux?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            It is a good point that not being included in the kernel is a severe limiting factor for ZFS adoption in the enterprise space. Many companies simply will not install ANYTHING outside of what comes in their Linux distribution's repos, and is supported by their vendor. For that reason btrfs usage in the enterprise space will grow as it eventually replaces ext4, and ZFS usage will likely hit a ceiling.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by OpenSLOWlaris
                              It was that other guy not me.

                              Learn to read names of the authors of the comments, you retard.
                              That you are the antiBSD troll with multiple accounts is obvious to anyone here.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X