and I think it's safe to say that Sun > is not about to bear > an inordinate cost simply to be able to instrument a > module that we feel > is obviated by ZFS. ;) >
I was afraid someone would say that - unfortunately, until ZFS is fitted with all of the bells and whistles that the combination of VxVM/VxFS has - true sync/async replication with data ordering, intimate integration of snapshots with NetBackup, and so on, we'll continue running VxVM/VxFS on our couple thousand Solaris systems. Just pragmatic... > And should Symantec wish to sponsor the work, we > would encourage them to > instead break up their absurdly large module. (Note > that this module > is larger than the kernel itself -- there's really no > excuse for that > much kernel text.) > I wonder who, or which group at Symantec would be a good contact point for such an effort... > Not that I have any opinions on this, of course... ;) > That's ok - you can afford to ;> Thanks for explaining the issue clearly. > - Bryan > -------------------- > Bryan Cantrill, Sun Microsystems Fishworks. > http://blogs.sun.com/bmc > _________________________________________ -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ dtrace-discuss mailing list [email protected]
