Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Jun 2007 20:50 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz
Mac OS X Perhaps overcome with excitement (and forgetting that Apple doesn't like such pre-emptive disclosures), Sun's Jonathan Schwartz announced today at Sun event in D.C. that Apple would be making ZFS 'the file system' in OSX 10.5 Leopard. "In fact, this week you'll see that Apple is announcing at their Worldwide Developer Conference that ZFS has become the file system in Mac OS X."
Thread beginning with comment 245801
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Notes
by Elektronkind on Thu 7th Jun 2007 03:28 UTC in reply to "Notes"
Member since:

Your logic is incredible.

Sun would love to keep ZFS to themselves, but that's the way the open source cookie crumbles.

You should run that statement by the many Sun-employeed engineers who cheered the announcement that ZFS is in FreeBSD now, and applaud Apple's prominent inclusion of it in Leopard.

ZFS isn't a magic bullet, it isn't mature compared to every other major file system, it still has bug fixes coming in all the time, and it has new features on the way

If you judge software stability by time and not by practice, you might just be right. But software isn't like wine, where the older it is the better it gets. In many cases, it can be the opposite. Bug fixes all the time? Show me a popular file system which goes for release upon release without bug fixes. I think this statement of yours illustrates your unfamiliarity with the providence of ZFS. Sun developed and release the initial rev of ZFS with stability as the primary goal, which the 50TB of disk I have under ZFS control would happily agree with. The overwhelming majority of code changes to ZFS since its release have focused on performance and features. Why is it like this? Well, if you wan a new fs which emphisized performance over stability when it left the gate, you are probably one who would enjoy things such as reiserfs *spit*.

Don't expect to see support for booting from ZFS. It is so early in development that test builds of Solaris don't even have support for it in the installer.

Alright, now your unfamiliarity with Solaris really shines through with this bit. Tell me how the Solaris installer has anything to do with Apple's ZFS implementation ?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Notes
by DigitalAxis on Thu 7th Jun 2007 05:23 in reply to "RE: Notes"
DigitalAxis Member since:

Well, they apparently want stability based on things like "I've used it for six years and it's never failed me yet", versus "I've used it for six months and it's never failed me yet", or "It's theoretically amazingly sound".

Now, all of those could apply to the same filesystem, just at different points along its lifespan. But we don't get to know which ones get 'time-tested stability' until they've been time-tested...

At least, I think that's how this goes. I've had the same confusion you have about this whole thing, especially when it's mostly used to justify the existence of the relatively featureless and performanceless filesystems, as if that's the only way to judge usefulness.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Notes
by Luminair on Thu 7th Jun 2007 05:39 in reply to "RE: Notes"
Luminair Member since:

Take it easy my zealous padre. Sun is a lot bigger than some project engineers.

I hope your confidence is well-placed and ZFS turns out to be the messiah of file systems in 5 months when Mac OS 10.5 is released.

> Tell me how the Solaris installer has anything to do with Apple's ZFS implementation ?

I'd like to believe that the creators of ZFS won't be beaten to the punch by a third party that is late to the party. But it's possible!

Reply Parent Score: 1