On Jan 20, 2013, at 4:51 PM, Tim Cook <t...@cook.ms> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Richard Elling <richard.ell...@gmail.com>
> On Jan 20, 2013, at 8:16 AM, Edward Harvey <imaginat...@nedharvey.com> wrote:
> > But, by talking about it, we're just smoking pipe dreams. Cuz we all know
> > zfs is developmentally challenged now. But one can dream...
> I disagree the ZFS is developmentally challenged. There is more development
> now than ever in every way: # of developers, companies, OSes, KLOCs, features.
> Perhaps the level of maturity makes progress appear to be moving slower than
> it seems in early life?
> -- richard
> Well, perhaps a part of it is marketing.
A lot of it is marketing :-/
> Maturity isn't really an excuse for not having a long-term feature roadmap.
> It seems as though "maturity" in this case equals stagnation. What are the
> features being worked on we aren't aware of?
Most of the illumos-centric discussion is on the developer's list. The
and BSD communities are also quite active. Almost none of the ZFS developers
out on this firstname.lastname@example.org anymore. In fact, I wonder why I'm
> The big ones that come to mind that everyone else is talking about for not
> just ZFS but openindiana as a whole and other storage platforms would be:
> 1. SMB3 - hyper-v WILL be gaining market share over the next couple years,
> not supporting it means giving up a sizeable portion of the market. Not to
> mention finally being able to run SQL (again) and Exchange on a fileshare.
I know of at least one illumos community company working on this. However, I do
know their public plans.
> 2. VAAI support.
VAAI has 4 features, 3 of which have been in illumos for a long time. The
feature (SCSI UNMAP) was done by Nexenta and exists in their NexentaStor
but the CEO made a conscious (and unpopular) decision to keep that code from
community. Over the summer, another developer picked up the work in the
but I've lost track of the progress and haven't seen an RTI yet.
> 3. the long-sought bp-rewrite.
Go for it!
> 4. full drive encryption support.
This is a key management issue mostly. Unfortunately, the open source code for
handling this (trousers) covers much more than keyed disks and can be unwieldy.
I'm not sure which distros picked up trousers, but it doesn't belong in the
and it doesn't expose itself to ZFS.
> 5. tiering (although I'd argue caching is superior, it's still a checkbox).
You want to add tiering to the OS? That has been available for a long time via
(defunct?) SAM-QFS project that actually delivered code
If you want to add it to ZFS, that is a different conversation.
> There's obviously more, but those are just ones off the top of my head that
> others are supporting/working on. Again, it just feels like all the work is
> going into fixing bugs and refining what is there, not adding new features.
> Obviously Saso personally added features, but overall there don't seem to be
> a ton of announcements to the list about features that have been added or are
> being actively worked on. It feels like all these companies are just adding
> niche functionality they need that may or may not be getting pushed back to
zfs-discuss mailing list