Peter Jeremy <peter.jer...@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> On 2011-May-25 03:49:43 +0800, Brandon High <bh...@freaks.com> wrote:
> >... unless Oracle's zpool v30 is different than Nexenta's v30.
>
> This would be unfortunate but no worse than the current situation
> with UFS - Solaris, *BSD and HP Tru64 all have native UFS filesystems,
> all of which are incompatible.
There are verious media formats out, but I know of only one format that defines
an enhencement method that really allows enhancements from various vendors
without problems and without the need for a common format commitee: tar.
The current enhanced POSIX tar format defines an enhancement method proposed by
Sun that works by defining a framework to introduce new features that all have
names with company prefixes.
What Sun defines for ZFS enhancements on the other side is bases on ideas that
are at least 30 years old and that try to prevent other entities from
introducing features, so it is not useful in a OSS world.
> I believe the various OSS projects that use ZFS have formed a working
> group to co-ordinate ZFS amongst themselves. I don't know if Oracle
> was invited to join (though given the way Oracle has behaved in all
> the other OSS working groups it was a member of, having Oracle onboard
> might be a disadvantage).
I recently made a proposal for a way to handle vendor specific enhancements but
nobody did contact me. Are you sure that such a group exists?
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
