On Mon, 09 Dec 2013 10:01:14 +0200 Alan McKinnon <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 09/12/2013 08:40, Nex6 wrote: > > * Carsten Haitzler <[email protected]> [2013-12-08 21:42:25 > > +0900]: > > > >> On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:25:04 +0000 Mick <[email protected]> > >> said: > >> > >>> On Sunday 08 Dec 2013 01:48:18 Steven@e wrote: > >>>>>> Hello beber, just for information, you dont need FUSE anymore > >>>>>> to use ZFS. zfsonlinux solves this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks for the info, but why should we need this ? I see no > >>>>> valid reason. > >>> > >>> There are out-of-tree Linux kernel modules care of ZFSOnLinux > >>> Project[1]. Therefore using ZFS-Fuse is not necessary (or > >>> recommended). At least one valid reason for using ZFS (there are > >>> many) is that it guards against fs corruption by using CRC > >>> checksums. > >>> > >>> I understand that both Oracle (RHL) Linux and SUSE consider BTRFS > >>> production ready and Oracle will be/are using this instead of > >>> ZFS. From my limited understanding BTRFS is being developed at > >>> speed and catching up with ZFS, but it does not have the amount > >>> of testing that ZFS had to date to vouch for its > >>> stability/maturity. At this stage in their development ZFS is > >>> superior to BTRFS in terms of functionality, although there is > >>> hope that BTRFS will develop at speed. > >> > >> and why? ext4 HAS been production ready for YEARS... inf act not > >> production ready... it has been *IN8 production for years... if > >> there is a fs i would trust - it's ext4. not zfs and DEFINITELY > >> not btrfs. ext4 (and 3 etc. before it) have many more miles of > >> PRODUCTION behind them. > >> > >> what this probably was ... was an unstable bleeding-edge kernel > >> since the servers are being run on gentoo and thus are not exactly > >> being conservative. it was probably a newly introduced bug that > >> hasn't been hammered out and other fs's used less will have such > >> bugs many times MORE than ext4 will. > > > > I am going to chime in and give my 2 cents. for filesystems, on > > production servers I tell our ops guys only use ext4 or xfs thats > > it. > > > Gentoo on critical production server that face the public without a > proper QA staging setup? Good lord, that's a scary thought. I banned > gentoo from production around here. > > Lest anyone think I'm a gentoo-hater, my personal workstation: > > > $ uname -a > Linux khamul 3.12.3-gentoo #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Dec 8 00:13:02 SAST 2013 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Meh we all have our different beliefs about such things. I personally use BTRFS at home, and switched from ZFS to BTRFS on a production server for a client. This thread can devolve into a "my distro / FS is better than yours" war, or we can just let the person that volunteered to do the work do it the way he's most comfortable with. -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
