Quoting [email protected] ([email protected]): > Last time I checked XFS had no support for reducing the size of a > filesystem.
Correct. > But if Stratis is going to use multiple XFS filesystems to compare > with the multiple ZFS mount points or BTRFS subvols then it will be a > massive problem. The design paper claims online grow abilities adequately meets their needs. I've only just now skim-read that paper, so I cannot comment. > Stratis is aiming for a version 1.0 release next year, and version 3.0 is > aimed at having ZFS feature parity. That's not good for all the people who > need ZFS features today! Welcome to the real world of software development, eh? RH aren't going to ship ZFS unless Oracle Corp. issue a licence exception (alongside the CDDL terms), and that's not going to happen. (Well, RH could ship FUSE_ZFS, but they aren't going to do that either, for reasons of performance.) > XFS has no support for checksums that compares to ZFS and BTRFS. To do it > properly you need to do it in the filesystem. Whitepaper section 10.2.2 et seq. talks about their plans in this area. _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main
