Linked by Marquis on Fri 22nd May 2009 13:02 UTC
FreeBSD For all of you using FreeBSD and ZFS, Kip Macy (kmacy) and Pawel Jakub Dawidek (pjd) merged ZFS Version 13 into FreeBSD 7-STABLE. Here is a breakdown of some of the new features: kmem now goes up to 512GB so arc is now limited by physmem, the arc now experiences backpressure from the vm (which can be too much - but this allows ZFS to work without any tunables on amd64), L2ARC Level 2 cache for ZFS which allows you to use additional disks for cache, and more.
Permalink for comment 365614
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: licences
by cade on Wed 27th May 2009 07:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: licences"
cade
Member since:
2009-02-28

It was mentioned
"... I doubt whether anyone in the Linux world cares about the OpenSolaris codebase."

Well, regarding the state of these OSes, we have a "newbie" operating system (i.e. Linux) that is not UNIX (i.e. is not able to adhere to a UNIX (i.e. properly designed) specification; where's IBM/HP to help with this ?) and had been developed from someone's bedroom versus a "beast" operating system (Solaris) developed in a commercial environment which has a proven commercial track record satisfying real-WORLD constraints and real-world warranties.

If users/developers of this "newbie" operating system have a hard time respecting the "beast" operating system for what it is then it's their problem and not a problem for (Open)Solaris user/developer/admin.


It was mentioned:
"... I doubt whether anyone in the Linux world cares about the OpenSolaris codebase. Linus himself has said as much from a kernel perspective."

Open-sourcing of OpenSolaris ensures the existence and advance of multiple OpenSolaris-based distributions. It appears a bit brave to think that Linux is the be-all/end-all in the operating system front and thinking that anything being open-sourced was intentional for the benefit of Linux. Actually, if Sun Microsystems were interested in Linux very-easily scalping Solaris-based technologies then OpenSolaris code would have been released using the viral GPL licence.


Do you really believe a non-standardised, hacked-away/unbridled operating system has serious use in life-support medical equipment, nuclear power station management, or operating system for multi-million dollar scientific equipment ?
Last time I checked (back in my doctoral work in late 1990's) this was not the case and for obvious reasons.
Although it has it's place, Linux has it's serious "cracks".

It was said:
"Solaris has nowhere near the depth or quality of device drivers that Linux has ..."

If it came down to device drivers then we all would be using Microsoft's operating systems and there are reasons why alternative (e.g. UNIX/UNIX-based) operating systems are preferred over Microsoft's operating systems. As with Theo de Raadt's view (Re: OpenBSD) we all realize that if the hardware companies were more forthcoming with hardware documentation then device driver support would be much better for many operating systems.

It was said:
" .. especially on x86 which is where it all started for Linux and where it all started to go wrong for Solaris."

Really.
Why is it that OpenSolaris on my Opteron-based HP xw9300 is superb for my user/development needs ?

Why is it that on installing FreeBSD, Linux, and OpenSolaris distributions on a new x86-based system for an existing/happy Linux user friend of mine it had caused my friend after about a week of testing to realise that OpenSolaris would be his preferred non-"Windows" platform ?


It was mentioned ...
"Solaris's userspace is also gradually being forced kicking and screaming into the 21st century with you guessed it, much of the (L)GPLed userspace software you'll find as standard on all Linux distros."

I hear no complaints from my OpenSolaris system whenever it runs (L)GPLed userspace software that Linux also runs.





It was said:
"... it's sad to think of how irrelevant much of OpenSolaris's codebase is now that large parts of it have been 'open sourced'.........eventually"

So, is Linux' code largely irrelevant because it was open-sourced ?

Still, why is it that cloning of Sun technologies like {ZFS, DTrace} got a junp-start after these technologies were open-sourced ?

Reply Parent Score: 1