Red Hat's Stratis 2.2 Linux Storage Solution Released

[gilboa]

yes, alternatively. as in "in alternative universe". in our universe it's default fs for suse enterprise distro. stratis is in development for more than 4 years already, btw. 4 years ago btrfs was just 8 years old. you don't have to be a god to know that

And the point being?
Does any of this makes BTRFS, as a storage solution, stable?
Does any of this makes RedHat decision less viable _to_ RedHat customers?

redhat as the only enterprise focused linux distro not employing btrfs devs has decided to use available python programmers to write some scripts on top of their legacy tech

1. You say legacy. I say technology that drivers IT operation worth 100's of billions of USD (And God knows how many ZB of data).
2. I would imagine that if RedHat wanted BTFS developers in house, they'd have a team up and running in 90 days. Possibly less. Do assume that RedHat is not stupid (as you seem to suggest) and simply has other considerations you either don't understand or don't want to understand.

- Gilboa

[pal666]

Alternatively, brfs has been in development for God knows how many years and have yet to mature to anything resembles enterprise quality FS

yes, alternatively. as in "in alternative universe". in our universe it's default fs for suse enterprise distro. stratis is in development for more than 4 years already, btw. 4 years ago btrfs was just 8 years old. you don't have to be a god to know that

(let alone a managed storage solution), and RedHat being the biggest enterprise focused Linux distribution has decided to take existing enterprise quality building blocks, such as XFS and LVM, and use them to develop an advance storage solution.

redhat as the only enterprise focused linux distro not employing btrfs devs has decided to use available python programmers to write some scripts on top of their legacy tech

You may not like it, but somehow I doubt that RedHat, with its 3.5B USD revenue , will care...

what you are trying to say? do you like every product of microsoft(which has much larger revenue)?

[gilboa]

as anyone with brains knows they want a red hat "supportable" solution. when you don't have btrfs devs, but you have python devs, all you can support is subj

Alternatively, brfs has been in development for God knows how many years and have yet to mature to anything resembles enterprise quality FS (let alone a managed storage solution), and RedHat being the biggest enterprise focused Linux distribution has decided to take existing enterprise quality building blocks, such as XFS and LVM, and use them to develop an advance storage solution.

You may not like it, but somehow I doubt that RedHat, with its 3.5B USD revenue , will care...

[mortn]

My point is exactly that Ceph is just as much a storage solution as btrfs, stratis or zfs.
It’s not like Ceph(FS) is so overly complex that we can't bring it up here or you need a degree to set it up. It's not a different animal. It's another animal.
We don't need to agree whether Ceph is in or out of context here though.

[mbod]

Want a distributed, extensively configurable, self-healing, copy-on-write storage system? Use Ceph. Been managing both large scale clusters and single node setups for years. Can recommend.

ceph is a completly different animal than zfs, btrfs, stratis etc. Why are you bringing this up here?

[pal666]

So the only reason is an alternative :-)

the only reason is lack of in-house expertise

[pal666]

Anyone who's anyone that follows anything that Red Hat does know why they want a Red Hat "owned" solution. Is this really a surprise to anyone?

as anyone with brains knows they want a red hat "supportable" solution. when you don't have btrfs devs, but you have python devs, all you can support is subj

[pal666]

Well I could imagine PNN (Phoronix news network) doing a benchmark with stratis vs zfs vs btrfs .

i suggest starting from filesystem resize benchmark

[mortn]

Want a distributed, extensively configurable, self-healing, copy-on-write storage system? Use Ceph. Been managing both large scale clusters and single node setups for years. Can recommend.

[cjcox]

Anyone who's anyone that follows anything that Red Hat does know why they want a Red Hat "owned" solution. Is this really a surprise to anyone?