I think on this, the big question is going to be whether Oracle continues to
release ZFS updates under CDDL after their commercial releases.
Overall, in the past it has obviously and necessarily been the case that
FreeBSD has been a '2nd class citizen'.
Moving forward, that 2nd class idea
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Nomen Nescio
Hi ladies and gents, I've got a new Solaris 10 development box with ZFS
mirror root using 500G drives. I've got several extra 320G drives and I'm
wondering if there's any way I
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Giovanni Tirloni
We've production servers with 9 vdev's (mirrored) doing `zfs send`
daily to backup servers with with 7 vdev's (each 3-disk raidz1). Some
backup servers that receive datasets
On Mar 24, 2011, at 02:03, Michael DeMan wrote:
The only remaining question would be the remaining crufts of legal
disposition. I could for instance see NetApp or somebody try and sue
ixSystems, but I have a really, really rough time seeing Oracle/LarryEllison
suing the FreeBSD foundation
Michael DeMan sola...@deman.com wrote:
Moving forward...
If Oracle continues to release critical ZFS feature sets under CDDL to the
community, then:
A) They are no longer pre-releasing those features to OpenSolaris
B) FreeBSD gets them at the same time.
If Oracle does not continue to
On Mar 24, 2011, at 5:42 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Nomen Nescio
Hi ladies and gents, I've got a new Solaris 10 development box with ZFS
mirror root using 500G drives. I've got several
On 3/21/2011 5:44 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
We do have support for running your own code using our API. Its just
that we can't reasonably be expected to support people who want do
things like... oh, zpool import -f (note the -f). Or editing
local configuration files that are also managed by
