David Magda wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2011, at 09:26, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > The long term acceptance for ZFS depends on how Oracle will behave past the
> > announced Solaris 11 is released. If they don't Opensource the related ZFS,
> > they will harm the future of ZFS. If they Opensource it ag
On 3/21/2011 5:44 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
We do have support for running your own code using our API. Its just
that we can't reasonably be expected to support people who want do
things like... oh, "zpool import -f" (note the -f). Or editing
local configuration files that are also managed b
Michael DeMan wrote:
> Moving forward...
>
> If Oracle continues to release critical ZFS feature sets under CDDL to the
> community, then:
>
> A) They are no longer pre-releasing those features to OpenSolaris
> B) FreeBSD gets them at the same time.
>
> If Oracle does not continue to release ZFS
On Mar 24, 2011, at 02:03, Michael DeMan wrote:
> The only remaining question would be the remaining crufts of legal
> disposition. I could for instance see NetApp or somebody try and sue
> ixSystems, but I have a really, really rough time seeing Oracle/LarryEllison
> suing the FreeBSD foundat
I think on this, the big question is going to be whether Oracle continues to
release ZFS updates under CDDL after their commercial releases.
Overall, in the past it has obviously and necessarily been the case that
FreeBSD has been a '2nd class citizen'.
Moving forward, that 2nd class idea becom
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Erik Trimble wrote:
> For a lot of reasons, Solaris has a long list of very superior functionality
> that make is very appealing for appliance makers. Right now, we see that in
> two areas: ZFS for storage, and high scaleability for DBs (the various
> Oracle Exa
On 3/23/2011 6:14 AM, Deano wrote:
OpenIndiana and others (i.e. Benunix) are distributions that actively
support full desktop workstations based on the Illumos base.
It is true, that the storage server application is a popular one and so has
supporters both commercially and others. ZFS is amazin
011 01:09
To: Jeff Bacon
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] best migration path from Solaris 10
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Jeff Bacon
wrote:
>> I've also started conversations with Pogo about offering an
> OpenIndiana
>> based workstation, which might b
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Nikola M. wrote:
> I think site: Phoronix.com already did comparisons with ZFS under several
> platforms and other (Linux) file systems without sweat.
with single disk configuration no less (er, more) ;)
You may want to check this instead: http://www.zfsbuild.com
On 03/23/11 09:07 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 01:54:54PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code.
Yes,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 01:54:54PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> >> Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code.
> >
> > Yes, we are at v28 at this point (the las
On Mar 22, 2011, at 21:09, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> Seeing that userland programs for *Solaris and derivatives (GUI,
> daemons, tools, etc) is usually late compared to bleeding-edge Linux
> distros (e.g. Ubuntu), with no particular dedicated team working on
> improvement there, I'm guessing the a
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Jeff Bacon wrote:
>> I've also started conversations with Pogo about offering an
> OpenIndiana
>> based workstation, which might be another option if you prefer more of
> Sometimes I'm left wondering if anyone uses the non-Oracle versions for
> anything but file s
> I've also started conversations with Pogo about offering an
OpenIndiana
> based workstation, which might be another option if you prefer more of
a
> general purpose solution.
>
> - Garrett
Just to highlight a point that seems often lost here - not everyone uses
Solaris/ZFS as a "file stor
On 3/21/2011 2:59 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
I *hate* talking about unreleased product schedules
:).
but I think you can expect a beta with a month or two, perhaps less.
We've already got an alpha that we've handed out in limited
quantities.
Actually, I read about that alpha; one of my cow
On 3/18/2011 6:32 PM, David Magda wrote:
Oracle has said that they "will distribute updates to approved CDDL
or other open source- licensed code following full releases of our
enterprise Solaris operating system."
http://unixconsole.blogspot.com/2010/08/internal-oracle-memo-leaked-on-solaris.ht
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 14:56 -0700, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> On 3/18/2011 3:15 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
> > c) NCP 4 is still 5-6 months away. We're still developing it.
>
> By the time I do some initial evaluation, then some prototyping, I don't
> anticipate migrating anything production wis
On 3/18/2011 3:15 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
a) Nexenta Core Platform is a bare-bones OS. No GUI, in other words
(no X11.) It might well suit you.
Indeed :), my servers are headless (well, as headless as you can get on
x86 hardware 8-/, they do have an ipmi remote console that still needs
to
On Mar 20, 2011, at 14:33, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> I hear from reliable sources that Apple is not doing anything with ZFS,
> so I would not look there for leadership.
Given that one of the prominent (?) file system guys at Apple left to form his
own ZFS company, I figured that was the case even
On Mar 20, 2011, at 09:26, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> The long term acceptance for ZFS depends on how Oracle will behave past the
> announced Solaris 11 is released. If they don't Opensource the related ZFS,
> they will harm the future of ZFS. If they Opensource it again, there is still
> a
> pr
Fred Liu wrote:
> Probably, we need place a tag before zfs -- Opensource-ZFS or Oracle-ZFS
> after Solaris11 release.
> If it is true, these two ZFSes will definitely evolve into different
> directions.
> BTW, Did Oracle unveil the actual release date? We are also at the cross
> road...
The
e: [zfs-discuss] best migration path from Solaris 10
>
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> >> Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code.
> >
> > Yes
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code.
>
> Yes, we are at v28 at this point (the lastest open-source version).
>
>> That said, ZFS on FreeBSD is kind of a 2nd c
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code.
Yes, we are at v28 at this point (the lastest open-source version).
> That said, ZFS on FreeBSD is kind of a 2nd class citizen still. [...]
That's actually not true. There are more F
g; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] best migration path from Solaris 10
Thanks for thinking about us, Paul.
A few quick thoughts:
a) Nexenta Core Platform is a bare-bones OS. No GUI, in other words (no
X11.) It might well suit you.
b) NCP 3 will not have an upgrade path to NCP
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:26:37PM -0700, Michael DeMan wrote:
> ZFSv28 is in HEAD now and will be out in 8.3.
>
> ZFS + HAST in 9.x means being able to cluster off different hardware.
>
> In regards to OpenSolaris and Indiana - can somebody clarify the relationship
> there? It was clear with O
Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code.
That said, ZFS on FreeBSD is kind of a 2nd class citizen still. FreeBSD
still gives equal (or higher) priority to ufs, and so some of the
changes in Solaris and derivatives (illumos) to make certain things like
NFS, CIFS, and COMSTAR/iSCSI work bette
On 03/19/11 12:17 AM, Toby Thain wrote:
> On 18/03/11 5:56 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
>> We've been running Solaris 10 for the past couple of years, primarily to
>> leverage zfs to provide storage for about 40,000 faculty, staff, and
>> students ... and at this point want to start reevaluating our b
On Mar 18, 2011, at 21:16, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
>> I think we all feel the same pain with Oracle's purchase of Sun.
>>
>> FreeBSD that has commercial support for ZFS maybe?
>
> Fbsd currently has a very old zpool version, not suitable for running with
> SLOGs, since if you lose it, you m
ZFSv28 is in HEAD now and will be out in 8.3.
ZFS + HAST in 9.x means being able to cluster off different hardware.
In regards to OpenSolaris and Indiana - can somebody clarify the relationship
there? It was clear with OpenSolaris that the latest/greatest ZFS would always
be available since it
> I think we all feel the same pain with Oracle's purchase of Sun.
>
> FreeBSD that has commercial support for ZFS maybe?
Fbsd currently has a very old zpool version, not suitable for running with
SLOGs, since if you lose it, you may lose the pool, which isn't very amusing...
Vennlige hilsener
I think we all feel the same pain with Oracle's purchase of Sun.
FreeBSD that has commercial support for ZFS maybe?
Not here quite yet, but it is something being looked at by an F500 that I am
currently on contract with.
www.freenas.org, www.ixsystems.com.
Not saying this would be the right so
Thanks for thinking about us, Paul.
A few quick thoughts:
a) Nexenta Core Platform is a bare-bones OS. No GUI, in other words (no
X11.) It might well suit you.
b) NCP 3 will not have an upgrade path to NCP 4. Its simply too much
change in the underlying packaging.
c) NCP 4 is still 5-6 month
On 18/03/11 5:56 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> We've been running Solaris 10 for the past couple of years, primarily to
> leverage zfs to provide storage for about 40,000 faculty, staff, and
> students ... and at this point want to start reevaluating our best
> migration option to move forward from S
We've been running Solaris 10 for the past couple of years, primarily to
leverage zfs to provide storage for about 40,000 faculty, staff, and
students as well as about 1000 groups. Access is provided via NFSv4,
CIFS (by samba), and http/https (including a local module allowing
filesystem acl's
35 matches
Mail list logo
