Rich via openzfs-developer wrote:
> The obvious pain points from my perspective would be the feature flag
> disparities between platforms, and how they bite people who get asked
> to try reproducing problems on other platforms. (Two examples that
> stick in my mind - multi_vdev_crash_dump unavailable on ZoL for a long
> time, and now the worse inverse of large_dnode only on ZoL.)
>
and the first thing the users ask is how to create a pool without just
multi_vdev_crash_dump=disabled, which of course you can't. You have to
disable all, then bring back the features all platforms have etc.
OsX:
Constant struggle with spotlight - its blackbox'ness makes figuring out why
it fails a pain - and behaves differently if you report as 'zfs' vs 'hfs'.
If someone loves RE (ida pro, hopper) feel free to jump in :)
Performance - osx port is slower on the same hardware, as compared to
freebsd, zol and illumos. (yeah, a user tried all three).
Saved revisions - osx has a 'versioning' (Permanent Version Storage)
framework, where past saves can be reverted. Another blackbox, no idea why
it fails with ZFS.
Support - Currently I am the only dev on osx (the other 3 are taking a
break) so all support is just myself, and it sucks when users lose data if
I can't figure out how to fix their pools.
Windows:
Not really worth discussing yet, and nor did you expect anything :) But
currently I have 2 guys assisting me, so I'd like to pretend we are close
to stable enough to call it "alpha". Maybe.
Lund
--
Jorgen Lundman | <[email protected]>
Unix Administrator | +81 (0)90-5578-8500
Shibuya-ku, Tokyo | Japan
------------------------------------------
openzfs: openzfs-developer
Permalink:
https://openzfs.topicbox.com/groups/developer/T1ce8db6589272d89-Mfb1ae3b04130e30713f2ba98
Delivery options: https://openzfs.topicbox.com/groups/developer/subscription
