Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ZFS On Linux Runs Into A Snag With Linux 5.0

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

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by GrayShade View Post
    It's about arbitrarily denying non-GPL modules access to SIMD. Do you believe it makes Linux better for anyone?
    yes. non-gpl modules are bad for linux. just look at overwhelming success of non-gpl kernels
    Last edited by pal666; 01-12-2019, 08:43 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by GrayShade View Post
    Should ZFS run slower on Linux because it's not GPL?
    should your piece of crap run slower because you can't write it properly? i don't know and i don't care

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by k1e0x View Post
    It's license is similar to MPL (are you reading this in Firefox, it's MPL too) and one could argue it's more permissive and free than Linux itself. (hence it's inclusion in FreeBSD, Mac OSX, even Microsoft Windows now. The only place it's "not allowed" is Linux.)
    that one would be stupid as a brick, because firefox is included everywhere including linux. the only one not included everywhere is zfs
    Originally posted by k1e0x View Post
    they are long since dead. Time to move on.
    feel free to stop beating dead zfs horse
    Originally posted by k1e0x View Post
    IMO this is dumb. NIH and zealots a lot. You have two pieces of awesome totally open source technology Linux and ZFS, make them work together and put *actual* commercial storage (cough NetApp) out of business.
    you can do even better by using one piece of awesome totally open source technology Linux and BTRFS, so what is stopping you?

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by gamerk2 View Post
    And this highlights the difference between Windows and Linux. On Windows, APIs get depreciated, but they still functionally work.
    yep, windows api is so stable that creative x-fi customers were left without sound for several years after vista release. what a brain-washed imbecile
    Originally posted by gamerk2 View Post
    And this highlights why I stopped developing for Linux over a decade ago.
    well, linux is the os for which most apps are developed (lookup android)
    so, who cares what some uneducated idiot did?

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by pgoetz View Post
    The filesystems I deal with on a daily basis: ext4, XFS, NTFS, ZFS, and md.
    there is a glaring omission of advanced zfs replacement in your list: btrfs
    Originally posted by pgoetz View Post
    For some situations, ZFS is the only currently reasonable solution.
    only for uneducated
    Originally posted by pgoetz View Post
    When you purchase storage servers, you have to decide a priori whether or not to configure with RAID controlers or HBA.
    you don't have to decide it every time. just never use raid controllers
    Last edited by pal666; 01-12-2019, 08:46 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by pgoetz View Post
    ZFS cultists -- you mean IT professionals who work with real users / real workloads?
    no, that would be me and i see no use for zfs

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by pgoetz View Post
    What someone who doesn't have to deal with real users and real world workloads might say. For at least a couple of my projects, ZFS is by far the best solution
    this means you've made mistake during judgement. in any case, you didn't get zfs from upstream, so target your complaints to party from which you get it, not to some unrelated party. or ask yourself to smarter select your vendors next time
    Last edited by pal666; 01-12-2019, 08:41 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by some_canuck View Post

    just a quick shortlist...
    LLNL has contributed to linux plenty, EDAC, lustre, ext4 are three examples.
    Sun gave you NFS.
    Oracle contributes quite a fair bit to linux, even if all they seem interested in is their UEK. They started btrfs.
    no, btrfs was started by one guy before he went to work for oracle. iirc he was working for suse.
    so what is stopping oracle from contributing zfs propely just as they "contributed" btrfs?

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    Above quote says all..
    there is a dominating linux kernel. and there is a bunch of trolls doing helpless bla bla bla on forums. not very smart and not very reality-aware trolls

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    I ask though, what's the probability that ZoL devs simply did not notice depreciation 10 years a go.
    it is probable, since they are not very smart in the first place
    those functions are also x86-only. so your zfs is as much of "linux filesystem" as nvidia windows blob is "linux driver". you can use it on linux as long as you agree to limit yourself to knee-elbow position

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X