4 ms·

ZFS may not need fsck, but it would be great if Oracle would re-open-source it. I've considered using it, but I can't trust that it has a future. I'm also rath

by abtinf 14y ago

ZFS may not need fsck, but it would be great if Oracle would re-open-source it. I've considered using it, but I can't trust that it has a future. I'm also rather confused by Oracle contributing to btrfs while also building ZFS privately. My intuition is that if they open-sourced ZFS and offered it under a dual BSD/GPL license, it would become the fs standard overnight.

antonios 14y ago
It has a future. FreeBSD and companies based on it like IXSystems have adopted it and developers are actively hacking it. In FreeBSD version 10 it will feature TRIM support as well as a new data compression scheme (LZ4): https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD10 https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD10
X-Istence 14y ago
ZFS is open sourced, and it is available in FreeBSD for example. Most of the development has been going on in Illumos and the team behind that are some of the original heavy hitters that worked on ZFS.
profquail 14y ago
Why use a dual BSD/GPL license? I think that would inevitably lead to a fork between the two versions -- for something like ZFS that's going to be used on many different platforms and which is already well-established, the Apache 2.0 license probably makes the most sense.