Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
ZFS On Linux Is Now Set For "Wide Scale Deployment"
Collapse
X
-
Yeah Linux is great step for the technology and i appreciate those guy who make the Linux..How much money is required to get the license of the Linux?
-
Originally posted by pdffs View PostWhat is with the stupid trolling? It's honestly hardly even worth posting/reading forum threads on Phoronix with the quantity of this kind of nonsense that seems to go on here. It's not even quality trolling.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by pdffs View PostWhat is with the stupid trolling? It's honestly hardly even worth posting/reading forum threads on Phoronix with the quantity of this kind of nonsense that seems to go on here. It's not even quality trolling.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by killing BSD View PostLinux is an awesome piece of marvelous enginnering and is free and open source.
ZFS is a piece of shit and is not true technology and also, it's proprietary. RETARD
We don't we ZFS on Linux, Those who say BTRFS is still unstable or whine about it are proprietary sluts. BTRFS will and is now kicking ZFSucks' gay ass to the moon.
Full Stop.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by uid313 View PostLinux is a great piece of technology and it is free and open source.
ZFS is a great piece of technology and it is free and open source.
It is just so sad that we can't integrate it mainline due to license incompatibilities.
License proliferation is harming the free open source software community.
ZFS is a piece of shit and is not true technology and also, it's proprietary. RETARD
We don't we ZFS on Linux, Those who say BTRFS is still unstable or whine about it are proprietary sluts. BTRFS will and is now kicking ZFSucks' gay ass to the moon.
Full Stop.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by GreatEmerald View PostNope, not going to use it. Btrfs does everything I need already, so why should I even bother with ZFS? Especially since it's under the CDDL.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by garegin View Postwhy don't you, for this job, just use freebsd or even better- solaris? solaris has the best/latest support for zfs
Are you fucking kidding me?
Might as well ask fucking Microsoft to store your data and smash your pc with a hammer
BTW, Guess who's back. ME!!!!!Last edited by killing BSD; 31 March 2013, 09:44 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Have been using ZoL for about a year now for bulk storage and VM backing (cloned ZVOLs are fantastic for this), and whilst there were some configuration-related teething problems when I first started, my patches were accepted, and it's been smooth sailing since. The recent decision for the open implementations (Illumos/FreeBSD/Linux/etc) to do away with version numbers and instead use a feature matrix is a great idea, and should make collaboration much easier, as features will be able to be implemented in parallel.
The two major features I'm keen to see implemented though are encryption, and libvirt support (for snapshots, volumes, clones, etc), (the former being difficult since it needs to be cross-platform compatible, and the latter being problematic because there seems to be little interest in supporting additional filesystems/volume-managers in libvirt). I may try implementing libvirt support at some stage if it doesn't happen, but it's a big job, since it needs to touch a lot of layers (probably all the way down to QEMU for full support).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by finalzone View PostThat was a deliberate decision from SUN when they were losing their market share against Linux system especially IBM and Red Hat.
As a result, binary ZFS on Linux cannot legally included out of box nor integrated into Linux kernel. When Oracle will decide to change ZFS license for GPL compatibility (unlikely), then it can. For now, ZFS is a legal minefield that out-weights its technical merit.
- Sun wanted a license that was like the GPL, but was friendly to binary drivers from third parties.
- Oracle is not able to relicense ZFSOnLinux. There are numerous other copyright holders that would also have to agree. Many of them would reject this idea because it would pose problems for code sharing between different implementations.
- There are no legal hurdles preventing Linux distributions from shipping binary ZFS modules. I had a meeting about this last year with one of the Gentoo trustees. Our meeting concluded that shipping binary ZFS modules is okay. That is why the Gentoo Foundation is shipping binary ZFS modules on its Live DVD. Other distributions are also beginning to ship ZFS on their install media. The only thing that prevented this from happening sooner was lack of man power. It takes a great deal of effort to integrate a new filesystem into a distribution when you are the first one to do it.
Last edited by ryao; 31 March 2013, 02:16 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by uid313 View PostLinux is a great piece of technology and it is free and open source.
ZFS is a great piece of technology and it is free and open source.
It is just so sad that we can't integrate it mainline due to license incompatibilities.
As a result, binary ZFS on Linux cannot legally included out of box nor integrated into Linux kernel. When Oracle will decide to change ZFS license for GPL compatibility (unlikely), then it can. For now, ZFS is a legal minefield that out-weights its technical merit.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: