
When it comes to dealing with storage, Solaris 10 provides admins with more choices than any other operating system. Right out of the box, it offers two filesystems, two volume managers, an iscsi target and initiator, and, naturally, an NFS server. Add a couple of Sun packages and you have volume replication, a cluster filesystem, and a hierarchical storage manager. Trust your data to the still-in-development features found in OpenSolaris, and you can have a fibre channel target and an in-kernel CIFS server, among other things. True, some of these features can be found in any enterprise-ready UNIX OS. But Solaris 10 integrates all of them into one well-tested package.
Editor's note: This is the first of our published submissions for the 2008 Article Contest.
Member since:
2005-07-07
Thanks for side-stepping it ;-).
I didn't I was pointing out how stupid your comment was.
Multiple, with no error checking between the layers.
Of course Sun wants everyone to use ZFS. Just like the linux guys want everyone to use linux or Apple wants every one to use a Mac. Should I go on? Its called a product and the process is marketing. Every single player in the computing industry from RedHat to some new startup is guilty of it.
Put down the crack pipe. My response was to your silly idea that something has to be around for longer than something else to be better.
Again put down the crack pipe.
Ask him. Obviously he is willing to put the time and effort into it because he finds the linux solution inadequate.
What nonsense? Give me a real world example. Apple wants to replace HFS+ and many people in the Apple community are very excited by it.
http://drewthaler.blogspot.com/2007/10/don-be-zfs-hater.html
Apple didn't make ZFS default in leopard not because of any intrinsic limitation of ZFS' design.
You are just hand waving. Give me some cogent technical details as to why you think it is not possible. Go into as much technical detail as you would like.
It doesn't violate any layers because it it trying to re-define them. Are you just plain daft?
If you go to implement something that was supposed to fit in a layer and then pruposefully change it to make it incompatible. You stupid claim makes sense.
ZFS was never designed to fit in that traditional layer and it was intentional because the designers thought the traditional model was broken. There is no violation.
People who love ZFS love it because ZFS doesn't use those unnecessary layers.
Then you didn't explain how ZFS was logically structured, nor did you explain these mythical points of failure.
ZFS has three layers. The ZPL, DMU and SPA. All of these have end to end checksuming. Unlike RAID, LVM and FS.
"I've implemented and supported a Linux-based storage system (70 TB and growing) on a stack of: hardware RAID, Linux FC/SCSI, LVM2, XFS, and NFS. From that perspective: flattening the stack is good. The scariest episodes we've had have been in unpredictable interactions between the layers when errors propagated up or down the stack cryptically or only partially (or, worse, didn't). With the experience we've had with the Linux-based system (which, admittedly, is generally working OK), it would be hard to imagine a more direct answer to every item on our list of complaints (not only reliability, but also usability issues) than ZFS, and I think the depth of the stack is ultimately behind for the large majority of those complaints.
Unsurprisingly, I'm aiming to migrate the system (on the same equipment) to ZFS on Solaris as soon as we can manage to. "
Here is the comment from the blog post. A lot of real world customers don't like the stupid layers. Get it!
You haven't explained a lot of things. Explain again in as much detail why ZFS can not coexist with other filesystems. Also what in its design makes it hard for Apple to implement it.
Yes it can. I already explained it to you and also linked to ZFS on FUSE using LVM.
Its evident you have never used ZFS and are just hanging on Andrew Morton's words and ranting. Let's get techincal. I am waiting for you techincal explanation. Don't just say it can't, show me exactly why it can't.
Rubbish! Prove it. All you have done is make claims. how about backing it up with some real examples and techincal discussions?