51–60 of 128 posts
It's confusing why btrfs support was prioritized ahead of zfs considering zfs' superior architecture and ops capabilities. Is docker (formerly dotcloud) going to start withholding capabilities as licensed features? Edit: prelim zfs driver work is here https://github.com/gurjeet/docker/tree/zfs_driver
It's confusing why btrfs support was prioritized ahead of zfs considering zfs' superior architecture and ops capabilities. Is docker (formerly dotcloud) going to start withholding capabilities as licensed features? Edit: prelim zfs driver work is here https://github.com/gurjeet/docker/tree/zfs_driver
What superior architecture does zfs have?
Has btrfs jumped ahead of zfs in ways I haven't heard about?
Edit - this is my first search result:
http://rudd-o.com/linux-and-free-software/ways-in-which-zfs-...
It's confusing why btrfs support was prioritized ahead of zfs considering zfs' superior architecture and ops capabilities. Is docker (formerly dotcloud) going to start withholding capabilities as licensed features? Edit: prelim zfs driver work is here https://github.com/gurjeet/docker/tree/zfs_driver
What superior architecture does zfs have?
Is Docker a good way to bring more security on a server with a few different websites? Separating the sites from each other and run nginx as a proxy in front of them? What's the overhead?
its not as good as using separate vms, but has arguably lower overhead also, its not really docker doing that, its LXC. Docker is an API around it.
However, the analogy I just made is only at a point in time. LXC is not the only Linux provider to manage cgroups/namespaces, it was just the most convenient at the time for the target audience. That is a fleeting position soon remedied.
If you'd like to know more, I'd encourage you to get involved with Docker development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What superior architecture does zfs have?
My understanding is that btrfs is still in catchup mode for the foreseeable future, but might eventually cover the distance. Has btrfs jumped ahead of zfs in ways I haven't heard about? Edit - this is my first search result: http://rudd-o.com/linux-and-free-software/ways-in-which-zfs-...
It's confusing why btrfs support was prioritized ahead of zfs considering zfs' superior architecture and ops capabilities. Is docker (formerly dotcloud) going to start withholding capabilities as licensed features? Edit: prelim zfs driver work is here https://github.com/gurjeet/docker/tree/zfs_driver
Swappable storage engines will be easier to create over time, not less. There's also a ZFS branch, but the reality is people spent time and resources on getting BTRFS (which has been experimental for >6mos) instead of ZFS.
Docker development works a lot like Linux development (just on a much, much smaller scale.) If there's an area where you're comfortable committing, the barrier to entry is minimal. All you need is 2 maintainers to agree to your addition and its merged in. So get on it!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is that btrfs is still in catchup mode for the foreseeable future, but might eventually cover the distance. Has btrfs jumped ahead of zfs in ways I haven't heard about? Edit - this is my first search result: http://rudd-o.com/linux-and-free-software/ways-in-which-zfs-...
I'd be biased to agree since that's Manuel's blog, someone I used to work with. I've supported 24x7 and 9x5 ops where downtime was unacceptable. zfs makes it a whole lot easier to perform upgrades, know data and metadata are solid and send snapshots around.
This about settles the question for me. Assuming that the implication that btrfs performs otherwise holds true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be biased to agree since that's Manuel's blog, someone I used to work with. I've supported 24x7 and 9x5 ops where downtime was unacceptable. zfs makes it a whole lot easier to perform upgrades, know data and metadata are solid and send snapshots around.
> ZFS uses atomic writes and barriers This about settles the question for me. Assuming that the implication that btrfs performs otherwise holds true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What superior architecture does zfs have?
Online scrubbing, so no downtime waiting for fsck for one. If you'd used it, you'd know how many hard won production battles solaris devs poured into making zfs better from the ground up. btrfs is oracle's NIH syndrome, reinventing the wheel instead of developing one that already had, pun intended, traction.
btrfs is the response to sun picking an incompatible license. when that is removed zfs might get more interesting for a lot of people.