begin quoting Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade as of Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 09:02:33AM -0700: > On Sep 12, 2007, at 4:56 AM, Dexter Filmore wrote: > > >>Personally, I'll take ZFS. It matches my usage patterns better *and* > >>actually gets compliance tested by Sun. > > > >Do I remember correctly that ZFS in Linux currently is only > >available via > >FUSE? > > That is correct. While NTFS3g has proven that you can get rather > good performance out of FUSE, the people porting ZFS to FUSE haven't > had much time for optimization, as I believe they're still working > out the "get everything working" part. :)
A vitally important task, I should think. If all we cared about was performance, well, /dev/null is *damn* fast. > If Sun ever re-licenses ZFS as GPL (whatever version), then we'll > likely see a kernel port of it to Linux. I thought the problem wasn't the license, but that ZFS telescopes multiple layers of the filesystem into one, while the linux filesystem folks are enamoured of their layer-cake API. > Until then, if you want ZFS, one of the OpenSolaris distributions is > your best bet, and of those, Nexenta (think Solaris + Ubuntu) is > likely the easiest to get started with. I thought the *BSDs were getting it/had got it. > If only I could figure out > the archane disk layout tool... You don't just say "Hey, ZFS, here's a disk! Do something with it!"? -- Still haven't gotten around to trying out ZFS yet. Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
