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 428627
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: brtfs
by vivainio on Mon 7th Jun 2010 18:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: brtfs"
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

So please, give me a real reason why people should choose BtrFS over ZFS (particularly given ZFS is still a few years ahead of BtrFS in terms of testing and development).


A real reaseon is indeed the same as not using NTFS - it doesn't really work well with my platform of choice, while btrfs is definitely getting there. There will never really be a choice between the two. In the end it's btrfs vs. ext4 vs ext3, really.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: brtfs
by dvzt on Mon 7th Jun 2010 19:18 in reply to "RE[4]: brtfs"
dvzt Member since:
2008-10-23

A real reaseon is indeed the same as not using NTFS - it doesn't really work well with my platform of choice


Who cares about your platform of choice?

How about giving it a little thought before replying about your platform of choice to "give me a real reason why people should choose BtrFS over ZFS"?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: brtfs - less specific wording
by jabbotts on Mon 7th Jun 2010 20:10 in reply to "RE[5]: brtfs"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

If the platform one is working with does not provide ZFS support then it's not really much of a choice for them regardless of what OS platform it is. But, maybe I read the example in more generic terms than was intended.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: brtfs
by vivainio on Mon 7th Jun 2010 20:32 in reply to "RE[5]: brtfs"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

A real reaseon is indeed the same as not using NTFS - it doesn't really work well with my platform of choice


...

Who cares about your platform of choice?


Er... I do?

Seriously speaking - I'm not a native English speaker, so I assumed that in the formulation above, "me" could be understood in a more abstract/passive sense than standing for myself (in a concrete fashion). I know I should have used "one's" instead of "my".

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: brtfs
by Laurence on Mon 7th Jun 2010 21:37 in reply to "RE[4]: brtfs"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

"So please, give me a real reason why people should choose BtrFS over ZFS (particularly given ZFS is still a few years ahead of BtrFS in terms of testing and development).


A real reaseon is indeed the same as not using NTFS - it doesn't really work well with my platform of choice, while btrfs is definitely getting there. There will never really be a choice between the two. In the end it's btrfs vs. ext4 vs ext3, really.
"
You've still not answered my question and furthermore, NTFS is used extensively because of Windows - so that's a terrible example.

I couldn't give a toss about your personal platform of choice. You made a statement that ZFS was going to die and I want you to provide evidence to back up your opinion. Thus far all you've done is spout yet more personal opinion.

Reply Parent Score: 2