Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Mar 2011 21:27 UTC
Windows Ever since Microsoft adopted its new 'silent treatment' development process, barely any news about the next version of Windows leaves Redmond. Now though, we have WinRumors stating that for Windows 8, Microsoft is finally going to do something visibly useful for desktop users with Shadow Copy, a feature first introduced in Windows XP.
Thread beginning with comment 468667
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Apple tried ZFS
by Kebabbert on Fri 1st Apr 2011 08:39 UTC in reply to "Apple tried ZFS"
Kebabbert
Member since:
2007-07-27

Apple tried ZFS and gave up, Microsoft seems to me even less likely. :-)

Chief architect of Apple HFS+ quit and is now starting up a new company to try to bring ZFS to Mac OS X. The reason? Because ZFS gives Data Integrity - whereas other filesystems do not protect your data against bit rot, etc.

Read more here:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/03/how-zfs-is-slowly-making-...



On Solaris, ZFS allows you to snapshot either home directory, or your system disk. You can keep numerous copies of your documents so you can go back in time. No fancy program is needed, this is just basic ZFS functionality. Only changes are saved, so you save lots of space with ZFS.

If you do several snapshots of your system install, you can boot into any of them via GRUB, and discard the snapshot that caused troubles.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Apple tried ZFS
by Lennie on Fri 1st Apr 2011 15:20 in reply to "RE: Apple tried ZFS"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I think I know how ZFS works.

I think I'll just wait for Linux to get Btrfs production ready and use that though.

Although I do have think the 'misuse' of these tree-like structures for filesystems, like ZFS, Reiser and Btrfs do, is a bit asking for throuble, it feels kind of fragile.

It complicates things in a big way so it takes a long time to get it in a stable state. Btrfs uses the most flexible and advanced version of such a structure, I think, which gives it great possibilities.

As I already run Linux on servers, desktops and pretty much everything else Btrfs is the logical choice.

I'm looking forward to being able to use Ceph as well (distributed storage build around the use of Btrfs).

Edited 2011-04-01 15:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Apple tried ZFS
by Kebabbert on Sat 2nd Apr 2011 11:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Apple tried ZFS"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

I think I know how ZFS works.

I think I'll just wait for Linux to get Btrfs production ready and use that though.

....

It complicates things in a big way so it takes a long time to get it in a stable state. Btrfs uses the most flexible and advanced version of such a structure, I think, which gives it great possibilities.

It seems to me that you do not know ZFS? There is only one reason to use ZFS; it protects your data. Other filesystems, such as XFS, JFS, ReiserFS, etc does not protect your data. Neither does Hardware raid.

Instead you talk about data structures? Who cares which data structure ZFS uses? It protects your data. Period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS#Data_Integrity


I doubt BTRFS protects your data, because no one succeeds in protecting your data (except ZFS) so why should BTRFS succeed? ZFS' purpose to protect your data, BTRFS purpose is for speed, performance and other fancy stuff - not protect your data.

Reply Parent Score: 2