Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Rich Braun wrote: > ZFS kernel module for Linux is not an Oracle/Sun-sponsored product, so far > as I can tell. Lawrence Livermore Labs appears to be the current sponsor (see > zfsonlinux.org) of the Linux upstream. A firm in India called KQ Infotech > pioneered this port but then got bought out by STEC earlier this year. Ah, so this isn't the FUSE user-space driver we've heard about before, but an actual kernel driver. http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatAboutTheLicensingIssue One way to resolve this issue is to implement ZFS in user space with FUSE where it is not considered a derived work of the kernel. This approach resolves the licensing issues but it has some technical drawbacks. There is another option though. The CDDL does not restrict modification and release of the ZFS source code which is publicly available as part of OpenSolaris. The ZFS code can be modified to build as a CDDL licensed kernel module which is not distributed as part of the Linux kernel. This makes a Native ZFS on Linux implementation possible if you are willing to download and build it yourself. Interestingly the very next question directs Ubuntu users to a repository of ready-built binary packages. :-) > There is a snapshot-oriented filesystem project sponsored by Oracle: > OCFS2. It's actually quite good. I haven't looked at its snapshots yet. What? Oracle wasn't busy enough developing Btrfs? They had to create another one? :-) I see the focus of OCFS2 is clustering, which is not necessarily the case for Btrfs. There doesn't seem to be a leading choice for clustering file systems for Linux. Plenty of options, but no clear leader. > Neither ZFS nor OCFS2 can compete for raw performance with ext4... Reference? One data point is: http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#PerformanceConsideration "...it should be made clear that the ZFS on Linux implementation has not yet been optimized for performance..." Of course performance is relative. If you are building a 4-drive NAS for a SOHO application, the performance difference between ZFS and Ext4 may be indistinguishable (or not? need to see some benchmarks), or at least a justified cost for a more self-maintaining storage appliance. -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |