4 ms·

Deprecated? In favour of what? Will Redhat too (like Ubuntu) start shipping ZFS?

by josteink 9y ago

tbrock 9y ago
XFS is the default FS on RHEL now, so likely that.
- vacri 9y ago
  Do you know if XFS can shrink volumes yet? As far as I'm aware, that's the only limitation it has compared to other filesystems of that era.
  - pferde 9y ago
    Nope, still can't. Not online, not offline.
  - rwmj 9y ago
    It can't, but you're probably better off using trim/discard/virt-sparsify rather than shrinking filesystems. Even on filesystems like ext4 that support it, shrinking can cause strange fs performance problems.
mjevans 9y ago
I supposed their upgrade path is... * Make fresh backups * Verify the backups * Re-install and use the backups
- paulie_a 9y ago
  Basically. Those steps should be done regardless of FS. I heard this on a podcast recently but if you are not doing that you end up with "schrodinger backups"
paulie_a 9y ago
The following will sound snarky but I would personally prefer ext2 if the other choice is btrfs. "ButterFs because your data melts away"
riffraff 9y ago
I am curious as to the same. The document says > Red Hat will continue to invest in future technologies to address the use cases of our customers, specifically those related to snapshots, compression, NVRAM, and ease of use. but it's unclear what this means exactly.
- pinewurst 9y ago
  Like their Permabit acquisition: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-acquires-permabit-assets-eases-barriers-cloud-portability-data-deduplication-technology?sc_cid=7016000000127NJAAY https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-acqui...
dman 9y ago
XFS - the workhorse that keeps on running.
pinewurst 9y ago
My best guess is XFS coupled with Permabit (which they just bought and will open source) compression and dedupe services. Probably layered on an enhanced mdraid too. I'm guessing that the ZFS licensing hairball is a bridge too far for even Red Hat, so they'll cobble together equivalent-ish functionality - even if it's not anywhere near as elegant as ZFS's integral data production and reduction.
silly-silly 9y ago
Red Hat will never ship ZFS, because its an entity that exists in the US and a probable target for lawsuits / license violation if ZFS is included.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  What's the risk involved for Red Hat in shipping ZFS? OpenZFS and ZFS-on-Linux are under the CDDL, a legitimate open-source license that some feel may be GPL-incompatible. Red Hat distributes non-GPL programs as a matter of routine, and I'm sure this includes other CDDL programs, especially considering Red Hat's enthusiastic involvement in the Java ecosystem. The only potential risk is that the GPL is so virulently infectious that any driver is automatically GPL'd by virtue of its own existence as a compiled kernel module, but that possibility seems fairly remote, and it hasn't seemed to affect the distribution of other purportedly-non-GPL kernel modules. I'm not a lawyer so maybe I'm missing something.
  - cryptonector 9y ago
    The risk is FUDdy, but not entirely imaginary. In particular there's the thread of a threat of patent lawsuits from a variety of players in the industry. Of course, that's always the case in this industry, so I don't buy it. But RH might, and that's their call. My guess too is that if Canonical manages to go a few years without a lawsuit from kernel copyright holders then we might see more of what it is doing. But RH would -I guess!- still suffer from patent FUD and so stay away from ZFS. That's all fine by me. The better for RH's competition. More competition, mo' betta.

Deprecated? In favour of what? Will Redhat too (like Ubuntu) start shipping ZFS?

tbrock 9y ago

XFS is the default FS on RHEL now, so likely that.

vacri 9y ago
Do you know if XFS can shrink volumes yet? As far as I'm aware, that's the only limitation it has compared to other filesystems of that era.
- pferde 9y ago
  Nope, still can't. Not online, not offline.
- rwmj 9y ago
  It can't, but you're probably better off using trim/discard/virt-sparsify rather than shrinking filesystems. Even on filesystems like ext4 that support it, shrinking can cause strange fs performance problems.

mjevans 9y ago

I supposed their upgrade path is... * Make fresh backups * Verify the backups * Re-install and use the backups

paulie_a 9y ago
Basically. Those steps should be done regardless of FS. I heard this on a podcast recently but if you are not doing that you end up with "schrodinger backups"

paulie_a 9y ago

The following will sound snarky but I would personally prefer ext2 if the other choice is btrfs. "ButterFs because your data melts away"

riffraff 9y ago

I am curious as to the same. The document says > Red Hat will continue to invest in future technologies to address the use cases of our customers, specifically those related to snapshots, compression, NVRAM, and ease of use. but it's unclear what this means exactly.

pinewurst 9y ago
Like their Permabit acquisition: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-acquires-permabit-assets-eases-barriers-cloud-portability-data-deduplication-technology?sc_cid=7016000000127NJAAY https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-acqui...

dman 9y ago

XFS - the workhorse that keeps on running.

pinewurst 9y ago

My best guess is XFS coupled with Permabit (which they just bought and will open source) compression and dedupe services. Probably layered on an enhanced mdraid too. I'm guessing that the ZFS licensing hairball is a bridge too far for even Red Hat, so they'll cobble together equivalent-ish functionality - even if it's not anywhere near as elegant as ZFS's integral data production and reduction.

silly-silly 9y ago

Red Hat will never ship ZFS, because its an entity that exists in the US and a probable target for lawsuits / license violation if ZFS is included.

cookiecaper 9y ago
What's the risk involved for Red Hat in shipping ZFS? OpenZFS and ZFS-on-Linux are under the CDDL, a legitimate open-source license that some feel may be GPL-incompatible. Red Hat distributes non-GPL programs as a matter of routine, and I'm sure this includes other CDDL programs, especially considering Red Hat's enthusiastic involvement in the Java ecosystem. The only potential risk is that the GPL is so virulently infectious that any driver is automatically GPL'd by virtue of its own existence as a compiled kernel module, but that possibility seems fairly remote, and it hasn't seemed to affect the distribution of other purportedly-non-GPL kernel modules. I'm not a lawyer so maybe I'm missing something.
- cryptonector 9y ago
  The risk is FUDdy, but not entirely imaginary. In particular there's the thread of a threat of patent lawsuits from a variety of players in the industry. Of course, that's always the case in this industry, so I don't buy it. But RH might, and that's their call. My guess too is that if Canonical manages to go a few years without a lawsuit from kernel copyright holders then we might see more of what it is doing. But RH would -I guess!- still suffer from patent FUD and so stay away from ZFS. That's all fine by me. The better for RH's competition. More competition, mo' betta.