> Not really, you missed the point. There are places where there is scope
> for innovation and people know they have ideas that go a lot beyond
> the current stuff that is deserves a clean slate implementation. Like
> ZFS. The ideas expressed in ZFS are revolutionary to say the least
> and could not have been done by re-using existing stuff. However there
> should exist a balance between redo everything and re-use otherwise
> one would start re-writing every piece in the name of innovation.
> OpenSource is also about a balance between the two.
Quite; and how ZFS is introduced doesn't require you to reinstall and
retrain your operators.
How ZFS is introduced is a wonderful example how disruptive technology can
be deployed without require reinstall or much required training.
first ZFS was introduced
then ZFS becomes bootable (install)
and also ZFS can be used by liveupgrade
But the system works as before.
> I am forced to work with IPS day in and day out at work. I have
> submitted bugs with fixes and working on add-in modules. I am very
> familiar with the codebase and inner workings of the complex beast,
> so I know what I am talking about!
>
> The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no different
> from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
> of ZFS features). From a developer point of view these qualities could have
> been got by far less effort and far less code/complexity.
>
I agree; if you look at the new features in OpenSolaris which are
disruptive, I come with the follow list:
DTrace ZFS SMF FMA BootAr IPS IA-Install
Clean slate? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
SA notices? N N Y N Y Y Y
Incompatible? N N N N N Y Y
Training req? N N Y N Y Y Y
Reinstall? N N N N N Y Y
Cannot avoid N N Y Y Y Y Y
Risk 0 0 2 1 2 5 5
Clean Slate: this was new technology developed with a clean slate
SA notices: unless you read the (marketing release/release notices), you
will not see this new technology.
Incompatible: old software and practices work
Training req: training is REQUIRED when administrating Solaris
Cannot avoid: this feature cannot be avoided
Reinstall required: when using this new software, install is needed
Risk: is my estimate for the risk to making this change to (Open)Solaris.
I haven't seen a lot of problems with FMA, except when you want to repair
a system; I have seen problems with SMF and the Boot archive (corrupted
repository, out-of-date or unbootable boot-archives). Problems with
DTrace and ZFS can, of course, all be avoided because you don't actually
need to use them.
In the end it comes to compute the benefit vs the risk.
Casper
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
