ZFS On Linux Runs Into A Snag With Linux 5.0

[pal666]

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

For some situations, ZFS is the only currently reasonable solution.

only for uneducated

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

[pal666]

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

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?

[pal666]

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

they are long since dead. Time to move on.

feel free to stop beating dead zfs horse

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?

[pal666]

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

[pal666]

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

[skeevy420]

yes. non-gpl modules are bad for linux. just look at overwhelming success of non-gpl kernels

Like the BSD kernel that Sony uses with their Playstation products? Sony is only the #1 in the world when it comes to game consoles and they use a non-gpl open source kernel.

[some_canuck]

we seem to have struck a nerve with pal the troll

[aht0]

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

Already know plenty of your opinions..
"Deutschland, Deutschland, khm,. Linux, Linux über alles,
über alles in der Welt.."

I'll leave it to you to figure out the exact origins of the hymn above

Server space, excepting web servers (intranet), is dominated by Windows servers (~60%+ - I am extrapolating it from analytical data applying to Netherlands, which is your average free democratic country, "as good as any other"), smart phone business dominated by Android.. will see if Google's Fuchsia would eat it out of the market or not in the future..

If I was you, I'd get down from that high horse. Strong alternatives make also Linux stronger.

[Weasel]

SIMD has to have the same protection switches as using FPU.

No it doesn't. Unless you refer to MMX but nobody really uses that. SSE is completely separate registers from the x87 FPU.

Thank you intel for deciding to recycle some the less stable register copy operations in side their cpus..

Again, plain wrong, nothing is recycled. And also floating point is not "unstable", it always gives the exact same result given the same state. However, you don't have to use floating point moves to move between SIMD registers (which is what copy operations are), so you are COMPLETELY wrong.

btw, SIMD have many integer operations and I'm pretty sure it's what the checksum uses. The AES instructions also operate on SIMD registers but they are pure logical/integer instructions only.

[Rallos Zek]

Like the BSD kernel that Sony uses with their Playstation products? Sony is only the #1 in the world when it comes to game consoles and they use a non-gpl open source kernel.

Is it Open Source still if you can see or inspect the code?