Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Jun 2010 10:15 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linux Employees of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have ported Sun's/Oracle's ZFS natively to Linux. Linux already had a ZFS port in userspace via FUSE, since license incompatibilities between the CDDL and GPL prevent ZFS from becoming part of the Linux kernel. This project solves the licensing issue by distributing ZFS as a separate kernel module users will have to download and build for themselves.
Thread beginning with comment 428550
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: brtfs
by Lennie on Mon 7th Jun 2010 11:55 UTC in reply to "brtfs"
Member since:

By the time they get a solid working module for the Linux kernel of ZFS (the FreeBSD-hackers took years to get it right), I'm pretty sure btrfs will already have matured quiet nicely. But with Linux betting on several horses isn't unusual.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: brtfs
by Kebabbert on Mon 7th Jun 2010 19:10 in reply to "RE: brtfs"
Kebabbert Member since:

"I'm pretty sure btrfs will already have matured quiet nicely."

Are you mad? It takes decades to iron out all bugs in a filesystem! ZFS has a dedicated team of among the best engineers in the world, and the test suite is very diligent. ZFS has been developed for years and is well tested. There are still some minor bugs, even 5 years after release. Sun has extensive Enterprise experience and know all about Enterprise storage.

If you really expect BTRFS, developed by some amateurs with no experience of Enterprise storage customers, to be stable at once - you are uneducated. Go and learn how to program. It will take decades to get it stable, just like ZFS. And Sun will not rest, ZFS develops in a rapid pace.

BTRFS is just a ZFS wanna-be. ZFS will add functionality, only afterwards BTRFS will mimic ZFS. BTRFS will never catch up. It is like Mac OS X and Win7

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[3]: brtfs
by foobar17294 on Mon 7th Jun 2010 20:41 in reply to "RE[2]: brtfs"
foobar17294 Member since:

Say "enterprise" ONE MORE TIME! I dare you!

"Enterprise" refers to software developed on a schedule with managers dictating the necessary set of features, and then engineers adapting to that. Functionality that there is no time to redesign will remain forever as kludges.

btrfs will succeed exactly because it isn't "enterprise". The software is evolved naturally, with no deadlines and no managers to dictate a set of features. Functionality that is consistent and sound from an engineering perspective gets implemented. Functionality that isn't, will be sent back to the drawing board until it is, or never implemented at all.

And yes, many btrfs developers have a long experience working with file systems.

tl;dr: btrfs is ZFS done right. btrfs is to ZFS as Linux is to Solaris.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: brtfs
by Zifre on Mon 7th Jun 2010 21:26 in reply to "RE[2]: brtfs"
Zifre Member since:

I really hope you are joking. Because you are a troll of the greatest order.

I really don't think that your post has a single fact in it. And you're also forgetting that Btrfs is from Oracle, who have plenty of experience in so called "enterprise storage".

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: brtfs
by nalf38 on Tue 8th Jun 2010 04:03 in reply to "RE[2]: brtfs"
nalf38 Member since:

yeah, those 'amateurs' over at f***ing ORACLE don't know how to make a filesystem.

Do your research before making a post like that.

Reply Parent Score: 3