Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Apr 2008 12:55 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Linux The (unstable and development-oriented only) filesystem Btrfs version 0.14 has been released. "Btrfs is a new copy on write filesystem for Linux aimed at implementing advanced features while focusing on fault tolerance, repair and easy administration. Initially developed by Oracle, Btrfs is licensed under the GPL and open for contribution from anyone."
Thread beginning with comment 312171
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: excited
by Wes Felter on Wed 30th Apr 2008 17:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: excited"
Wes Felter
Member since:
2005-11-15

I don't think that argument holds, since Btrfs is busy copying all the "layer violation" features from ZFS such as RAID.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 7

RE[5]: excited
by sbergman27 on Wed 30th Apr 2008 17:51 in reply to "RE[4]: excited"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I don't think that argument holds, since Btrfs is busy copying all the "layer violation" features from ZFS such as RAID.

No. That is a mischaracterization. Btrfs is intended to work closely *with* dm and lvm. A certain minimum amount of functionality is duplicated between btrfs and the current dm and lvm where absolutely necessary. Read what Chris says about this:

http://lwn.net/Articles/265533/

Edited 2008-04-30 17:59 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[5]: excited
by diegocg on Wed 30th Apr 2008 18:44 in reply to "RE[4]: excited"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

So? What makes ZFS completely unsuitable for Linux is the fact that it's not just a filesystem - not even a "filesystem + volume manager". ZFS is a complete software stack from the VFS to the storage driver.

This is why ZFS supports io priorities and UFS-solaris doesn't: They have the "old" IO stack and the "new" ZFS stack. In the Linux kernel this would not be acceptable at all. When Linux develops a new piece of the IO stack such the io priorities, it must work for all the filesystems. If that piece only works with a filesystem, it'd be considered misdesigned and would not be merged. This is why in Linux you have IO priorities support not only for a given filesystem like ext3, but also for filesystems like FAT - for any kind of filesystems, in fact the io priority thing doesn't interacts so much with the filesystems, but with the block devices.

So if ZFS were GPL, some parts would be need to be redesigned to be merged in Linux. BTRFS, in the other hand, is just a filesystem that plugs cleanly in the Linux design.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[6]: excited
by jwwf on Wed 30th Apr 2008 19:24 in reply to "RE[5]: excited"
jwwf Member since:
2006-01-19

This is why ZFS supports io priorities and UFS-solaris doesn't: They have the "old" IO stack and the "new" ZFS stack. In the Linux kernel this would not be acceptable at all. When Linux develops a new piece of the IO stack such the io priorities, it must work for all the filesystems. If that piece only works with a filesystem, it'd be considered misdesigned and would not be merged. This is why in Linux you have IO priorities support not only for a given filesystem like ext3, but also for filesystems like FAT - for any kind of filesystems, in fact the io priority thing doesn't interacts so much with the filesystems, but with the block devices.


In general I don't think you are incorrect. However, I don't think this is literally true. For instance, I am pretty sure that each major Linux FS implements journaling using its own private subsystem. There is a standard subsystem now, JBD, but only ext3 uses it.

Moral of the story is, if the right political factions are behind it, anything goes.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 3