5 ms·
The only thing preventing me from adopting zfs is that it is not being part of the linux kernel.
by verroq 6y ago
The only thing preventing me from adopting zfs is that it is not being part of the linux kernel.
- lmm 6y agoZFS was one of the reasons I switched to FreeBSD, and it turned out to have a lot of other advantages too. Might be worth a look?
- iso947 6y agoWhen ZFS came out I tried OpenSolaris on a 48 disk machine. Regretted it immensely, that was the last sun hardware we bought Simply it didn’t fit with the hundreds of other linux boxes we had. We ended up scrapping the zfs idea and bout 1000+ disks (about 2PB) worth of linux storage over the next decade, on xfs and ext4. Had Sun’s x4500 platform worked with a Debian based linux we’d have bought that instead of supermicro. Sun lost because of their choice to exclude zfs from linux. From what I can tell, zfs is/was great, but wasn’t good enough to change our standard OS, and since then people moved to object storage
- jjav 6y ago> When ZFS came out I tried OpenSolaris Historical context: ZFS predates OpenSolaris by quite a few years, so the above statement can't be technically true.
- iso947 6y agoYes you’re correct it was normal Solaris 10, this was about 12 years ago. On my evaluation I was comparing with a satabeast and hp320s at the time, and I said that “zfs probably outweighs the problems of running Solaris” The box was still in use in 2012, we were having issues and a “zfs upgrade” was suggested, but at that point we were adding new storage on linux.
- rleigh 6y agoI did the same, and no regrets. ZFS and FreeBSD are a great combination. Wish I'd made the move several years earlier.
- bogomipz 6y agoCould you or someone else is why it's able to be part of the FreeBSD kernel but not the Linux kernel? I'm guessing this is a licensing and/or legal issue?
- ghaff 6y agoLicense compatibility. CDDL is a weak, file-based license similar to the MPL. It is generally (though not universally) believed to be incompatible with the GPL. (Which may or may not have been intentional. Again, accounts differ.) In any case, the Linux kernel along with Red Hat for its distributions won't incorporate ZFS code for this reason. The fact that it's Oracle that owns the copyright doubtless doesn't help. FreeBSD is BSD licensed of course and that's considered compatible with CDDL given that CDDL is file-based.
- bogomipz 6y agoThanks ok yes that sounds familiar. For anyone else interested, this is a good read: https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2016/linux-kernel-cddl.html https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2016/linux-kernel-...
- zokula 6y agoToo bad FreeBSD is a crappy operating system.
- jjav 6y agoZFS is so awesome that for my file server I pick the OS based on ZFS support, not the other way around. Currently still running OpenSolaris on my ZFS server, probably will be FreeBSD next time I upgrade the hardware, but time will tell. Regardless of the OS, it will be ZFS!
- iamtedd 6y agoOpenSolaris is dead, isn't it? Presumably you started when it was released/still alive, but hasn't it not had any security updates for years? Why not OpenIndiana/Other IllumOS variant?
- seized 6y agoDitto, I run OpenIndiana but FreeBSD would be my next choice. Can't live without boot environments on physical hardware.