4 ms·

> Coherency, security, stability, ZFS... My only sort of complaint in regards to FreeBSD is actually ZFS. Not that it's not fantastic, or that it shouldn't be

> Coherency, security, stability, ZFS... My only sort of complaint in regards to FreeBSD is actually ZFS. Not that it's not fantastic, or that it shouldn't be there. ZFS does however clearly comes from Solaris, and there have been no effort to make the ZFS command line tools feel more BSD like. Changing the tooling around ZFS probably isn't a great idea, but coherency has clearly taken a backseat to features in this case.

gtirloni 5y ago
It's coherent with the other ZFS implementations in Linux and Solaris.
- nrr 5y ago
  Likewise, apropos storage systems that handle logical volume management, Linux's LVM tools are extremely reminiscent of those from HP-UX[0], and NetBSD's LVM guide explicitly calls out their tooling being built from Linux's lvm2tools[1]. There's a modest amount of precedent for this kind of thing. 0: lvcreate(1M) from HP-UX 11i https://nixdoc.net/man-pages/HP-UX/man1/lvcreate.1m.html https://nixdoc.net/man-pages/HP-UX/man1/lvcreate.1m.html 1: http://www.netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/chap-lvm.html http://www.netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/chap-lvm.html
MisterTea 5y ago
> Changing the tooling around ZFS probably isn't a great idea, but coherency has clearly taken a backseat to features in this case. Right, because ZFS is a foreign piece of software that runs on other operating systems. At that point you are better off keeping those tools coherent with other ZFS implementations. This is a good compromise.