From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p5R8Mq7I058450 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 03:22:52 -0500 Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id AC3493064C for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (mo-65-41-216-221.sta.embarqhsd.net [65.41.216.221]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id yfwylY1rL8mlH4yF for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E083DDA.1000101@hardwarefreak.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 03:22:50 -0500 From: Stan Hoeppner MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: question on new feature complexity/possibility/sensibility? (^ Alternate) References: <4E067D81.4070605@tlinx.org> <20110627003209.GD32466@dastard> <4E080249.9060903@tlinx.org> <20110627060240.GF32466@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20110627060240.GF32466@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs-oss On 6/27/2011 1:02 AM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 09:08:41PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: >> >> >> Dave Chinner wrote: >>> So use a filesystem that supports them natively ;) >> --- >> Got any in in mind that also support acls, extended attrs >> and has the reliability and performance of xfs? ;-) > > For most "normal" workloads, ZFS would probably be your only > production ready option. But that's not something you could use on > Linux, is it? :/ It is apparently usable on Linux for those willing to build and maintain it themselves. But that level of administrative burden in itself is the opposite of production ready. > Until btrfs is a completely baked cake, you won't be able to tick > all those boxes, and even then there will be questions about > performance... Or until Oracle releases ZFS under GPL, or a compatible license, which probably isn't going to happen. Apparently Oracle believes their SPARC and x86 hardware won't sell if ZFS is free on Linux. Now that Oracle owns Solaris and ZFS I'd bet they wish they could put the BTRFS genie back in the bottle, as well as OCFS, etc. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs