I'd recommend typical end-users not interested in purchasing equipment
from Oracle consider Nexenta's product line for storage serving.
I can tell you that we offer real support, and we have the latest code
base with the most tightly integrated kernel other than Oracle's
product. (And in many cases, we bring features into a shipping product
sooner than Oracle does.)
I've not tried the FreeBSD ZFS implementation, but I've heard that it
suffers from a performance standpoint -- its also a bit behind the
Solaris derived platforms. The Linux effort is far too immature to
trust any real data to it, and may wind up never getting any real legs
underneath it due to license related conflicts.
- Garrett
On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 18:31 -0500, Haudy Kazemi wrote:
> For the ZFS diaspora:
>
> 1.) For the immediate and near term future (say 1 year), what makes a
> better choice for a new install of a ZFS-class filesystem? Would it be
> FreeBSD 8 with it's older ZFS version (pool version 14), or
> NexentaCore with newer ZFS (pool version 25(?) ), NexentaStor, or
> something else? OpenSolaris 2009.06, Solaris 10 10/09, FreeBSD
> 8-STABLE and 8.1-RELEASE all use pool version 14. Linux ZFS-FUSE
> 0.6.9 is at pool version 23, and Linux zfs-0.5.0 is at pool vesion 26.
>
> Are there any other ZFS or ZFS-class filesystems on a supported
> distribution that are worthy of consideration for this timeframe?
>
>
> 2.) IllumOS appears to be the likely heir to what was known as
> OpenSolaris. They have their own mailing lists at
> http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo . Interested community members
> might like to sign up there in case there is a sudden unavailability
> of opensolaris.org and its forums and lists. Nexenta is sponsoring
> IllumOS. Nexenta also appears somewhat insulated from the demise of
> OpenSolaris, and is a refuge for several former Sun engineers who were
> active on OpenSolaris. Genunix.org and the Phoronix.com forums are
> other places to watch.
>
>
> Other comments inline:
>
>
> Russ Price wrote:
> > My guess is that the theoretical Solaris Express 11 will be crippled
> > by any or all of: missing features, artificial limits on
> > functionality, or a restrictive license. I consider the latter most
> > likely, much like the OTN downloads of Oracle DB, where you can
> > download and run it for development purposes, but don't even THINK
> > of using it as a production server for your home or small business.
> > Of course, an Oracle DB is overkill for such a purpose anyway, but
> > that's a different kettle of fish.
> >
> > For me, Solaris had zero mindshare since its beginning, on account
> > of being prohibitively expensive. When OpenSolaris came out, I
> > basically ignored it once I found out that it was not completely
> > open source, since I figured that there was too great a risk of a
> > train wreck like we have now. Then, I decided this winter to give
> > ZFS a spin, decided I liked it, and built a home server around it -
> > and within weeks Oracle took over, tore up the tracks without
> > telling anybody, and made the train wreck I feared into a reality. I
> > should have listened to my own advice.
> >
> > As much as I'd like to be proven wrong, I don't expect SX11 to be
> > useful for my purposes, so my home file server options are:
> >
> > 1. Nexenta Core. It's maintained, and (somewhat) more up-to-date
> > than the late OpenSolaris. As I've been running Linux since the days
> > when a 486 was a cutting-edge system, I don't mind having a GNU
> > userland. Of course, now that Oracle has slammed the door, it'll be
> > difficult for it to move forward - which leads to:
> 1a. NexentaStor Community Edition may also be suitable for home file
> server class uses, depending on your actual storage needs. It
> currently has a 12 TB limit, measured in actual used capacity.
> http://support.nexenta.com/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&kbarticleid=69&nav=0,15
>
>
> > 2. IllumOS. In 20/20 hindsight, a project like this should have
> > begun as soon as OpenSolaris first came out the door, but better
> > late than never. In the short term, it's not yet an option, but in
> > the long term, it may be the best (or only) hope. At the very least,
> > I won't be able to use it until an open mpt driver is in place.
> >
> > 3. Just stick with b134. Actually, I've managed to compile my way up
> > to b142, but I'm having trouble getting beyond it - my attempts to
> > install later versions just result in new boot environments with the
> > old kernel, even with the latest pkg-gate code in place. Still, even
> > if I get the latest code to install, it's not viable for the long
> > term unless I'm willing to live with stasis.
> >
> > 4. FreeBSD. I could live with it if I had to, but I'm not fond of
> > its packaging system; the last time I tried it I couldn't get the
> > package tools to pull a quick binary update. Even IPS works better.
> > I could go to the ports tree instead, but if I wanted to spend my
> > time recompiling everything, I'd run Gentoo instead.
> >
> > 5. Linux/FUSE. It works, but it's slow.
> > 5a. Compile-it-yourself ZFS kernel module for Linux. This would be a
> > hassle (though DKMS would make it less of an issue), but usable -
> > except that the current module only supports zvols, so it's not
> > ready yet, unless I wanted to run ext3-on-zvol. Neither of these
> > solutions are practical for booting from ZFS.
> >
> > 6. Abandon ZFS completely and go back to LVM/MD-RAID. I ran it for
> > years before switching to ZFS, and it works - but it's a bitter pill
> > to swallow after drinking the ZFS Kool-Aid.
>
> 7.) Linux/BTRFS. Still green, but moving quickly. It will have
> crossed a minimum usability and stability threshold when Ubuntu or
> Fedora is willing to support it as default. Might happen with Ubuntu
> 11.04, although in mid-May there was talk that 10.10 had a slight
> chance as well (but that seems unlikely now).
>
> 8.) EON NAS or other OpenSolaris based distros. They don't seem to
> have a bright future in store as they're derivatives of OpenSolaris,
> unless they are able to transition to being based on IllumOS (which is
> conditional on how IllumOS progresses.) On the other hand, it may not
> matter much if there aren't more updates to them as long as they work
> well enough in their current form for NAS type applications. I.e.
> they're used until the next solution is available, like some are still
> using OpenSolaris 2009.06 instead of one of the development releases.
>
>
>
> In another thread about a month ago Garrett D'Amore (from Nexenta and
> working with the IllumOS project which Nexenta is a sponsor of)
> wrote:
> > There is another piece I'll add: even if Oracle were to stop
> > releasing
> > ZFS or OpenSolaris source code, there are enough of us with a vested
> > interest (commercial!) in its future that we would continue to develop
> > it outside of Oracle. It won't just go stagnant and die. I believe I
> > can safely say that Nexenta is committed to the continued development
> > and enhancement of this code base -- and to doing so in the open.
> >
>
>
> From
> http://blogs.nexenta.org/blog/2010/08/13/opensolaris-no-more-and-nexenta/
> > It appears that the rumors may be true and that Oracle may have
> > decided to move towards a more closed model for the development of
> > Solaris. You can see a blog post with the leaked internal memo
> > here:
> >
> > http://sstallion.blogspot.com/2010/08/opensolaris-is-dead.html
> >
> > If so, what does this mean for Nexenta?
> >
> > Well, for NexentaStor customers and partners nothing will change.
> > We’ve been planning for this contingency for a long time. Clearly
> > we’ll have to fork. Thanks in part to the take off of Illumos we’ll
> > be able to continue to our core development in the open, and we’ll
> > continue to contribute back all fixes such as the fairly recent ZFS
> > Monitor to the community.
> >
> > The leaked memo does state that Oracle will open source the CDDL
> > components — however they’ll only do so when they release their
> > Solaris commercial releases and not before.
> >
> > We are already seeing hundreds of new customers that are experienced
> > with OpenSolaris for storage – and we welcome these customers with
> > open arms. NexentaStor can address your storage needs better than
> > OpenSolaris ever could, and we look forward to proving this to you
> > every day.
> >
> > We also hereby make more explicit our support for Illumos. In
> > addition to being a key contributor of engineering resources we are
> > happy to announce that we are going to contribute 1% of the equity
> > of Nexenta Systems to the forthcoming Illumos foundation. I’m
> > confident that this 1% will be worth millions to the Illumos
> > foundation. We would suggest that other companies consider a
> > similar approach. We were planning to announce this when the
> > Illumos foundation was announced but given today’s rumors, I think
> > it is worth announcing today.
> >
> > We’d like to see more support offered to OpenSolaris / Illumos
> > users, however we’re not sure that we are the right company to offer
> > that support; we remain focused on our mission of “enterprise class
> > storage for everyone”. If you are a support provider interested in
> > speaking with us about how we might work together, please feel free
> > to comment below or to reach out either directly or via the Illumos
> > community. We’re happy to help third party support providers emerge
> > to address the demands of the Illumos / OpenSolaris community.
> >
> > Last but certainly not least, we continue to feel that we’re on the
> > same side as Oracle in the overall battle for openness and choice in
> > enterprise storage. Without their early work on ZFS there is no way
> > that we could have achieved the “take off” we’re experiencing.
> > And, by both existing in the market we give customers the freedom
> > from vendor lock-in they clearly demand; you can migrate from
> > NexentaStor to an Oracle ZFS based solution and back in hours, as
> > opposed to the months or quarters it takes to move off a legacy
> > array. We continue to value that joint value proposition in the
> > market and certainly respect the world-class engineering of ZFS and
> > related software.
> >
>
> Also see
> http://blogs.nexenta.org/blog/2010/08/14/the-hand-may-be-forced/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
