/* Catching up on email */
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:27:39 pm Eric Anopolsky wrote:
In case anyone is interested, ZFS already has been ported to Linux as a
FUSE module. A very talented GSoC participant did the port as his
project.
A GSoC student who got employed by Cluster Filesystems to do
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:38:57 -0400
Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 18:10 +0200, Ahmed Kamal wrote:
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS with btrfs.
Just kidding, I don't think it would be technically feasible.
May I suggest the name
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Stephan von Krawczynski
sk...@ithnet.com wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:38:57 -0400
Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
The short answer from my point of view is yes. This doesn't really
change the motivations for working on btrfs or the problems we're
Dmitri
now that ZFS' IP has been imported into Oracle
You write as though this is a completed task. In reality, there are several
hurdles (as seen from the IBM offer), and it will take at least six months to
get to the point that you assume has been complete. To EFFECTIVELY merge the
IP will
Hello everyone,
Just a quick note about the recently announced purchase of Sun by
Oracle. This does not change Oracle's plans for Btrfs at all, and Btrfs
is still a key project for us.
Please, keep your btrfs contributions and testing coming ;)
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:37:33AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
Just a quick note about the recently announced purchase of Sun by
Oracle. This does not change Oracle's plans for Btrfs at all, and Btrfs
is still a key project for us.
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS with btrfs.
Just kidding, I don't think it would be technically feasible.
May I suggest the name ZbtrFS :)
Sorry couldn't resist. On a more serious note though, is there any
technical benefits that justify continuing to push money in btrfs
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 18:10 +0200, Ahmed Kamal wrote:
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS with btrfs.
Just kidding, I don't think it would be technically feasible.
May I suggest the name ZbtrFS :)
Sorry couldn't resist. On a more serious note though, is there any
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Ahmed Kamal
email.ahmedka...@googlemail.com wrote:
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS with btrfs.
Just kidding, I don't think it would be technically feasible.
May I suggest the name ZbtrFS :)
Sorry couldn't resist. On a more serious note
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Andrey Kuzmin
andrey.v.kuz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Ahmed Kamal
email.ahmedka...@googlemail.com wrote:
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS with btrfs.
Just kidding, I don't think it would be technically feasible.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Andrey Kuzmin
andrey.v.kuz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Ahmed Kamal
email.ahmedka...@googlemail.com wrote:
But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 21:18 +0400, Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Andrey Kuzmin
andrey.v.kuz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Ahmed Kamal
email.ahmedka...@googlemail.com
Chris Mason wrote:
Hello everyone,
Just a quick note about the recently announced purchase of Sun by
Oracle. This does not change Oracle's plans for Btrfs at all, and Btrfs
is still a key project for us.
Please, keep your btrfs contributions and testing coming ;)
-chris
Just to chime in
Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
snip
Personally, I don't see any. Porting zfs to Linux will cost (quite)
some time and effort, but this is peanuts compared to what's needed to
get btrfs (no offense meant) to maturity level/feature parity with
zfs. The only thing that could prevent this is CDDL
14 matches
Mail list logo
