On 08/18/2010 11:49 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Bill Longman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 08/18/2010 11:03 AM, Nganon wrote: >>> Clear now, thanks. >>> >>> >>> If you want a robust filesystem, look into ZFS/BTRFS. >>> >>> >>> AFAIK ZFS is unmaintained and BTRFS is not stable, am I wrong? > > Why do you believe ZFS is unmaintained?
That's Nganon's comment. I'll let him answer. > >> Not really. ZFS is only available on Solaris right now. I seem to >> remember it was running on one of the BSD's, too, since it's a matter of >> licensing that is the hurdle of greatest height. I've only played with >> BTRFS on my dev box and the simple workout I gave it did not tax it in >> any way--it worked okay. > > ZFS has a very free license. This was the reason, why it could be ported to > the > BSDs. So why do you believe there is a "license hurdle"? Only for getting it to run on Linux. The CDDL doesn't play well with GPL. > Also note: btrfs now is three years old. ZFS was started aprox. 10 years ago. > For this reason, btrfs is expected to need another 7 years to readh the level > of stability currently seen with ZFS. Might take even less!
