Andrey Kuzmin wrote:

> 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 licensing issues
> and patent claims from NTAP over zfs snapshots  and other features;
> btrfs is free from both.

There's one thing you're overlooking: the core kernel developers have 
already stated that ZFS is a "rampant layering violation" and otherwise 
indicated they do not want ZFS in the Linux kernel, whereas BtrFS has
gotten a much more positive response. It may well be that on the /Oracle/ 
side, the political and technical problems with porting ZFS are smaller than 
those with finishing BtrFS, but if the kernel developers wouldn't accept it, 
_any_ money and effort spent on it would be wasted money and effort.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to