Ian Murdock wrote:
> 
> One thing I don't see on the requirements list is ZFS as the default
> file system.
> 
> This really needs to be there. It's one of the killer features of
> Solaris, and we should make sure we use it to maximum advantage.

I agree but it would be nice to keep some room for alternatives. For
example there is QFS which is far more capable in other areas like
performance, "Quality Of Service", multiple writers and other advanched
features (for example the abilty to split data from inodes+log, e.g. you
can put data on normal disks and inodes+log in other disks (which
becomes very usefull if you put inodes+log on solid state disks, making
access to these data _much_ faster and seperate the accesses from the
main data, resulting in a faster and "smoother" data throughput...)).

And ZFS currently lack important features like "user quotas" which
renders ZFS currently _unuseable_ for universities or other large sites
with many directories shared by multiple users and the NFS performance
on ZFS is currently not very good (for example builting OS/Net (the
OpenSolaris "core") on a NFS directory backed by ZFS needs significantly
more time than the same setup on NFS+UFS) and on older machines the
performance can be described as "disaster".

Or short: IMO it would be nice to keep support for alternatives in
Solaris/OpenSolaris/Indiana alive...

----

Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)
_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss

Reply via email to