3 ms·
See the earlier comment to you. I think you have this 100% backwards. I heard similar comments to yours inside some large Linux vendors, too, and I think they
by lproven 3y ago
See the earlier comment to you.
I think you have this 100% backwards. I heard similar comments to yours inside some large Linux vendors, too, and I think they betray a profound misunderstanding about the nature of large-scale Unix deployments over the years.
FOSS Unix is recent and mostly small-scale and transient deployments of containers, not long-term storage... but before that, there were decades of vast scale commercial Unix systems, which dwarf the FOSS stuff.
- worthless-trash 3y agoHow many zfs systems you think are running right now, all hours combined compared to linux ext filesystems ?
- lproven 3y ago"Bananas are better than passion fruit because there are more bananas being grown!" ZFS is an enterprise storage-management tool. It's not just another hard disk format, like ext4. Not many people are running Linux boxes with root on ZFS because few distros support that. Single-disk setups are not its strength so the number of single-disk setups of ZFS compared to ext4, which only supports single-disk setups, is irrelevant. Even saying that, though... I bet all FreeBSD deployments are on ZFS, and it's got a solid enterprise presence. Anything streamed off Netflix anywhere is being served by FreeBSD. Oracle still supports Solaris. All Solaris, OpenSolaris, Illumos, Nexenta, OmniOPS, SmartOS, Tribblix... all on ZFS. And it's still not its core area. If you want to do a fair comparison let's hear about companies doing petascale to exascale arrays with double-digit to quadruple-digit numbers of drives. How many of them do you reckon use ext4?
- worthless-trash 3y agoI'm not the one who moved the goal posts here though was I ? Here, let me quote myself. > The software is being used by more people, which means it will expose more bugs.