On 6/16/2010 9:49 AM, Fabrizio Giudici wrote:
Again on this... Well, if I go to the BTRFS page
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page I still read a warning:
*Btrfs is under heavy development, but every effort is being made to
keep the filesystem stable and fast. As of 2.6.31, we only plan to
make forward compatible disk format changes, and many users have been
experimenting with Btrfs on their systems with good results. Please
email the Btrfs mailing list if you have any problems or questions
while using Btrfs.*
OTOH ZFS is stable and has been production for years. Oracle was
behind btrfs and now owns ZFS, and I've only read Oracle talking (a
lot) about ZFS. Ok, there's a chance that the two things get merged,
but in this case it makes no sense to say btrfs vs ZFS. In the other
case, Oracle would stop funding btrfs. I don't see how it's well on
its way to eclipse ZFS. Can you explain me? :-)
It will eclipse ZFS once it works close enough to ZFS for most Linux
usage -- as few if any will consider ZFS as a reason to use Solaris then.
Linux does not have to be better than Solaris. It just has to be close
enough for most usage.
If OpenSolaris was as open and accessible as Linux (e.g. you could get
patch set updates as easily as for Linux for starters), then Linux might
have a higher bar to clear -- but OpenSolaris is failing in this bid by
most all accounts.
I'm no Linux fan-boy -- I'd love to see Solaris and OpenSolaris thrive
(though I'm not a fan-boy for these either). I just don't think Oracle
will pull this off.
--
Jess Holle
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java
Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
