The Solaris Operating System includes many file systems, and more are available as add-ons. Deciding which file system to apply to a particular application can be puzzling without insight into the design criteria and engineering tradeoffs that go into each product.This article offers a taxonomy of file systems, describes some of the strengths and weaknesses of the different file systems, and provides insight into the issues you should consider when deciding how to apply the set of file systems that are available for specific applications. This article requires an intermediate reader.
Design, Features, and Applicability of Solaris File Systems
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
For solaris only one FS comes to mind. VXFS hands down.
No virtual filesystem puts Solaris on par with SCO. The most critical portion of your OS belongs to a third party with their own licensing, support etc. On what planet besides uranus do you have your head up where this even sounds like a decent os? Solaris has been trash since version 5 and has not improved where it’s important.
You mean Uranus Teenysystems?
http://budugllydesign.com/archivebud/uranus/uranus.html
> No virtual filesystem puts Solaris on par with SCO.
Solaris has always had a VFS layer. What other kind of “virtual filesystem” are you talking about?
> The most critical portion of your OS belongs to a third party with their own
> licensing, support etc.
I don’t know what you are talking about — Solaris comes with UFS, and has had an integrated volume manager since Solaris 9 shipped. As of Solaris 9 update 2, UFS w/ logging + SVM is quite competitive with VxVM.
> Solaris has been trash since version 5 and has not improved where it’s
> important.
This is just trolling.
Solaris has had SVM included actually since 8 (it’s just better integrated in 9). And yes with UFS + logging and using Direct I/O or Asynchronous I/O when appropriate gives you most of what 95% of the population needs. Veritas still has some nice features but folks have to judge for themselves if it’s worth the extra costs.
what i believe he is getting at is that Sun doesn’t own all (ie. 100%) their code since the SVR4 base is lincensed from SCO. Sun couldn’t go open source since it’s bound by some license agreements. I think thats really a lame argument that goes nowhere, but I thought I might be able to clarify the troll’s point.
what i believe he is getting at is that Sun doesn’t own all (ie. 100%) their code since the SVR4 base is lincensed from SCO. Sun couldn’t go open source since it’s bound by some license agreements. I think thats really a lame argument that goes nowhere, but I thought I might be able to clarify the troll’s point.
Except that code was developed at and licensed by AT&T’s USL, not SCO. SCO having ownership of it now moot point considering Sun essentially has complete control of it now for use in Solaris and has had so long before SCO ever owned the code.
what i believe he is getting at is that Sun doesn’t own all (ie. 100%) their code since the SVR4 base is lincensed from SCO. Sun couldn’t go open source since it’s bound by some license agreements. I think thats really a lame argument that goes nowhere, but I thought I might be able to clarify the troll’s point.
Incorrrect. A while back (2 years or so) they made the Solaris source code downloadable. To compile it, you needed to have the SUN compilers on hand. As for source code availability now, SUN has always been willing to share their code with their third parties. There is no grilling session or torture chamber one needs to be subjected to before getting the code.
> what i believe he is getting at is that Sun doesn’t own all (ie. 100%) their
> code since the SVR4 base is lincensed from SCO. Sun couldn’t go open
> source since it’s bound by some license agreements. I think thats really a
> lame argument that goes nowhere, but I thought I might be able to clarify
> the troll’s point.
But Sun bought out *all* their rights to the AT&T code a few years back. See, for example:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/linuxunix/0,39020390,39115381,00.h…
That included the right to sell derivatives of it — that’s why they are able to offer indemnity to their Linux customers. The open source issues are due to other problems.
In agreement with Jonathan Adams. I believe Sun and AT&T co developed SVR4. Since the codeveloped the product I think Sun might have a special license from AT&T such that SCO can not take them to court.
Solaris probably has very little AT&T code left in it anyway. A lot of stuff has in Solaris has probably been rewritten over the years, it is evident if you read solaris internals.