Originally posted by discordian
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu's ZFS Installation Work Will Continue Into The 20.04 LTS Cycle
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostYeah sure, the ability to seamlessly rollback any update or system change, make backups and such with an online system, be able to compress the filesystem contents (which can decrease disk space usage significantly, and if you use VMs it's even more important) is something no consumer wants.
...Also totally not what OpenSUSE is already doing with btrfs. Nothing to see there, move along. ZFS is only for enterprise.
Comment
-
Originally posted by alcalde View PostWell that's the point... you can already do all that with btrfs, so what's the point of putting all the work into doing it all over again with ZFS?
Canonical has never learned to work with others.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by alcalde View PostWell that's the point... you can already do all that with btrfs, so what's the point of putting all the work into doing it all over again with ZFS?
And before we all flame Canonical for going their own way, I'd like to point out that they are probably the more conservative ones in the bunch, as ZFS is the more proven here.
RedHat went the "full retard" way and decided they would create something new and better with XFS extensions, LVM and dm-crypto, and call this Stratis. Could be amazing or not. I personally really hope it turns well.
OpenSUSE is betting on Btrfs.
Oracle is offering their respin of CentOS with Btrfs.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanL View PostHow is enabling support for ZoL (in addition to all the other choices, including btrfs) in the installer an example of not working well with others? Either find facts that back your assertion or take your FUD elsewhere.
This is another example of the entire Linux community going one way and Canonical seemingly deciding to duplicate the work of others rather than collaborate. As for the accusation of FUD, I've written a novella-length catalog of Canonical's lack of cooperation in the past. In fact, at this point, to suggest that Canonical has a history of cooperation and collaboration with others in the Linux community would be a Sagan-esque extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.
Comment
-
Originally posted by alcalde View PostWell, doing something alone isn't an example of working well with others, is it?
If they want these things, let them contribute to btrfs, work with OpenSUSE, etc.
This is another example of the entire Linux community going one way and Canonical seemingly deciding to duplicate the work of others rather than collaborate.
As for the accusation of FUD, I've written a novella-length catalog of Canonical's lack of cooperation in the past. In fact, at this point, to suggest that Canonical has a history of cooperation and collaboration with others in the Linux community would be a Sagan-esque extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.
To simply make the statement that "Canonical never learned to play with others" is pure BS. I wouldn't even call it a half truth.
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostRedHat went the "full retard" way and decided they would create something new and better with XFS extensions, LVM and dm-crypto, and call this Stratis. Could be amazing or not. I personally really hope it turns well.
I do wish them all the best with it. But it's going to be an uphill battle for them to push this on a userbase who can see full well what its limitations are compared with the competition. I do wonder exactly who they are going to pitch this technology to. Is it solely RHEL customers who are locked into RedHat technologies irrespective of their actual merit?
Comment
-
Originally posted by rleigh View Post
Hopefully it will work well. But I'm very sceptical. RedHat effectively own LVM (via Sistina) and XFS. They clearly want to maximise their investments in the companies and technologies involved, since they employ a number of very experienced developers for all these parts. However... LVM is very dated technology. XFS is a decade older again. No matter how well you cobble these bits together with glue and duct tape (Python and D-BUS), LVM with thinpools and XFS with a bunch of extensions to allow it to communicate with the other layers, is never going to surpass ZFS in terms of features, performance or reliability. I took a detailed look at it a few months back, and it's a poor man's ZFS with a tiny fraction of its capabilities.
I do wish them all the best with it. But it's going to be an uphill battle for them to push this on a userbase who can see full well what its limitations are compared with the competition. I do wonder exactly who they are going to pitch this technology to. Is it solely RHEL customers who are locked into RedHat technologies irrespective of their actual merit?
It's for people who want and like ZFS but don't like having to deal with all the ZFS hoops and hurdles since it isn't treated as a first class citizen in LinuxLand.
Comment
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
Do you have any idea how "dated" ZFS is? There are a lot of arguments to pick on these positions. That's not a very good one in this instance.
It's for people who want and like ZFS but don't like having to deal with all the ZFS hoops and hurdles since it isn't treated as a first class citizen in LinuxLand.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
Quite frankly, most of ZFS "hoops and hurdles" are actually in using it, due to ZFS's own architecture. It's not hard to ship a known-working default system with ZFS if you are a distro maintainer.
For an end-user wanting to use ZFS for more than a non-root based data storage solution, there's a lot of studying up that needs to be done so you don't hit a FUBAR scenario and have to start over*. One wrong zpool upgrade and the bootloader is hosed. Most of hoops and hurdles mainly effect us legacy people stuck with GRUB -- having to deal with both that and actual ZFS stuff gets old and my frustration shows it
*Granted that that's true to take full advantage of any advanced file system and not limited to ZFS.
Comment
Comment