3 ms·
I'm more interested in seeing what happens with regard to Sun's esteemed ZFS and the GPL'ed competing file system, BTRFS, that Oracle is working on. It seems fo
by ryandvm 17y ago
I'm more interested in seeing what happens with regard to Sun's esteemed ZFS and the GPL'ed competing file system, BTRFS, that Oracle is working on. It seems foolish for Oracle to continue devoting resources to two heavyweight file systems with overlapping functionality.
I suppose I'll keep on dreaming that Oracle will update ZFS with a GPL license and the process of inclusion in Linux would swiftly begin...
- ajross 17y agoI thought Oracle's sponsorship of btrfs was limited to the two employees working on it, or something like that. Contrast with probably dozens of folks Sun has/had working on Solaris filesystem stuff. Linux work is comparatively cheap, and has significant upsides when measured in community goodwill. Obviously they have to keep supporting existing Solaris customers, as ZFS is a shipping product. But I'd be very surprised if they pulled the plug on a high-profile free software project directly. Maybe if they simultaneously GPLed ZFS, I guess.
- nailer 17y agoSame here, but ZFS isn't BTree structured, whereas BTRFS is both Btree and copy-on-write (ReiserFS was Btree but not COW) - giving you better speed along with the similar featureset.
- bensummers 17y agoBTRFS: the new shiny, more potential, but definitely not suitable for use in production. ZFS: uses older ideas (because they didn't think COW B-tree was possible) but is suitable for production use. It'd be nice to have both pushed forward, so there's something for now and something for later.