OpenZFS 2.0-RC3 Released With Bug Fixes, Intel QAT Support For Newer Kernels

[phoronix]

Phoronix: OpenZFS 2.0-RC3 Released With Bug Fixes, Intel QAT Support For Newer Kernels

The third release candidate of OpenZFS 2.0 is now available for this open-source ZFS file-system implementation currently for Linux and FreeBSD platforms...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OpenZFS-2.0-RC3-Released

[horizonbrave]

should someone send the memo to Mr. Torvalds?

[Alexmitter]

should someone send the memo to Mr. Torvalds?

Rather they should send a memo to whoever can license that thing under a proper license, this time please GPL compatible. Otherwise this FS is under life support anyway. Its not like there arent alternatives to ZFS that satisfy its users too beside the hype.

[skeevy420]

Rather they should send a memo to whoever can license that thing under a proper license, this time please GPL compatible. Otherwise this FS is under life support anyway. Its not like there arent alternatives to ZFS that satisfy its users too beside the hype.

For an all-in-one solution, ZFS is the best there is. With any Linux native file system we have to use layers of tools to get the same features ZFS offers with itself, and that's just for the average desktop/laptop hype features like compression, encryption, and backups. And that's why ZFS matters. It was designed to be a server file system, yet it covers most all the use cases that a desktop user would want. So much so that the number one desktop Linux distribution uses it for their desktop.

Stratis and BTRFS are the only two Linux-native file systems that come close to doing what ZFS does; even combined with LUKS neither covers all the use-cases that ZFS covers. I'm hoping that Stratis will be a good GPL replacement for ZFS, but until XFS gains case sensitivity and compression ZFS is a better desktop user file system but, frankly, it feels disingenuous to even give the honorable mention to Stratis right now. It's not like it's available as a Root file system anywhere. Even "life support" ZFS has Root and Tooling support at the distribution install level from multiple distributions and operating systems whereas Stratis is basically limited to a role as an optional RHEL data drive file system. It really needs more roles than that for more than file system nerds to take it serious and give it notice.

GPL compatible doesn't seem to matter that much when you really get down to it. GPL incompatible Nvidia's GPU marketshare dominates everyone else. AMD and Intel combined doesn't come close to Nvidia. What's one of the first things most every Linux user does? We enable the non-free repos. GPL compatible is only a high horse argument and has no real world ramifications when so much of the content we use our computers for isn't GPL compatible. The majority of our games, music, movies, books, and dare I say software are not GPL compatible and yet they can run on GPL compatible software.

[OneTimeShot]

GPL compatible doesn't seem to matter that much when you really get down to it. GPL incompatible Nvidia's GPU marketshare dominates everyone else. AMD and Intel combined doesn't come close to Nvidia. What's one of the first things most every Linux user does? We enable the non-free repos. GPL compatible is only a high horse argument and has no real world ramifications when so much of the content we use our computers for isn't GPL compatible. The majority of our games, music, movies, books, and dare I say software are not GPL compatible and yet they can run on GPL compatible software.

If the license doesn't matter, why not just use Windows or MacOS? Those have higher marketshare and also run more games and music.

[Lynden]

For an all-in-one solution, ZFS is the best there is. With any Linux native file system we have to use layers of tools to get the same features ZFS offers with itself, and that's just for the average desktop/laptop hype features like compression, encryption, and backups. And that's why ZFS matters. It was designed to be a server file system, yet it covers most all the use cases that a desktop user would want. So much so that the number one desktop Linux distribution uses it for their desktop.

Stratis and BTRFS are the only two Linux-native file systems that come close to doing what ZFS does; even combined with LUKS neither covers all the use-cases that ZFS covers. I'm hoping that Stratis will be a good GPL replacement for ZFS, but until XFS gains case sensitivity and compression ZFS is a better desktop user file system but, frankly, it feels disingenuous to even give the honorable mention to Stratis right now. It's not like it's available as a Root file system anywhere. Even "life support" ZFS has Root and Tooling support at the distribution install level from multiple distributions and operating systems whereas Stratis is basically limited to a role as an optional RHEL data drive file system. It really needs more roles than that for more than file system nerds to take it serious and give it notice.

GPL compatible doesn't seem to matter that much when you really get down to it. GPL incompatible Nvidia's GPU marketshare dominates everyone else. AMD and Intel combined doesn't come close to Nvidia. What's one of the first things most every Linux user does? We enable the non-free repos. GPL compatible is only a high horse argument and has no real world ramifications when so much of the content we use our computers for isn't GPL compatible. The majority of our games, music, movies, books, and dare I say software are not GPL compatible and yet they can run on GPL compatible software.

I wouldn't consider stratis an alternative if their faq is up to date which says:
"For current releases of Stratis it doesn’t. In fact if you create a Stratis pool with multiple devices you increase the risk of data loss as you now have multiple devices which are required to be operational to access the data."

https://stratis-storage.github.io/faq/

And is XFS capable of detecting things like bit rot?
Because aside from the features you mentioned (compression, snapshots, etc), ZFS is primarily used for it's data safety capabilities and as far as I know only BTRFS comes close to matching that.

Please correct me if I'm wrong though.


Aside from that, the sequential resilvering should be good for the people stuck with SMR drives

[skeevy420]

If the license doesn't matter, why not just use Windows or MacOS? Those have higher marketshare and also run more games and music.

Same could be said about a BSD variant, Haiku, or any other OS that isn't Linux. The question then becomes why do you prefer the OS you prefer; and we all have our own reasons for liking the OS we like.

But the license isn't very relevant because of how much of the average user's userspace isn't compatible, the non-OS portion of the system. GPL and Linux only matters if one wants their code as part of the Linux kernel or as part of an already GPL project, but it matters very little if one wants to do their own thing in userspace or wants to be a module like ZFS or Nvidia.

[mbod]

Rather they should send a memo to whoever can license that thing under a proper license, this time please GPL compatible. Otherwise this FS is under life support anyway. Its not like there arent alternatives to ZFS that satisfy its users too beside the hype.

All the time people say zfs has a wrong license. No it doesnt. CDDL is an open source license. The license seems to be incompatible with the GPL2 so that the zfs source code will not be merged into the kernel tree. But that is it. You can use the zfs modules just fine and there is no license issue with that.

If you are so much into the license topic, then look at the graphic drivers. From NVIDIA will all know that it is closed source with a proprietary license. But even the AMD driver is not completely open source. The AMD opencl module is still closed source under a proprietary license. Is that a problem for you too?

Honestly I do not understand this whole license FUD. It is not appropriate.

[mbod]

I wouldn't consider stratis an alternative if their faq is up to date which says:
"For current releases of Stratis it doesn’t. In fact if you create a Stratis pool with multiple devices you increase the risk of data loss as you now have multiple devices which are required to be operational to access the data."

This is because stratis so far only supports RAID0. But that will change.

And is XFS capable of detecting things like bit rot?

XFS has checksums for meta data since a very long time. And as far as I know checksum for data is being worked on.