On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, James Andrewartha wrote:
There is a huge difference practically - OpenSolaris has no free security
updates for stable releases, unlike FreeBSD. And I'm sure you don't recommend
running /dev in production.
If OpenSolaris was to do that, then it would be called Solaris. :-)
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Michael DeMan (OA) wrote:
Args for FreeBSD + ZFS:
- Limited budget
- We are familiar with managing FreeBSD.
- We are familiar with tuning FreeBSD.
- Licensing model
Args against OpenSolaris + ZFS:
- Hardware compatibility
- Lack of knowledge for tuni
Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
> > If you think about it a little bit, you will see that there is no
> > significant difference in the licensing model between FreeBSD+ZFS and
> > OpenSolaris+ZFS. It is not possible to be a "little bit pregnant". Either
> > one is pregnant, or one is not.
> >
>
> Well, Fre
2009/12/8 "C. Bergström"
> Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Michael DeMan (OA) wrote:
>>>
>>>
Args for FreeBSD + ZFS:
- Limited budget
- We are familiar with managing FreeBSD.
- We are famil
Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Michael DeMan (OA) wrote:
Args for FreeBSD + ZFS:
- Limited budget
- We are familiar with managing FreeBSD.
- We are familiar with tuning FreeBSD.
- Licensing model
Args against OpenSolari
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Michael DeMan (OA) wrote:
>>
>> Args for FreeBSD + ZFS:
>>
>> - Limited budget
>> - We are familiar with managing FreeBSD.
>> - We are familiar with tuning FreeBSD.
>> - Licensing model
>>
>> Args against OpenSolaris + ZF
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Michael DeMan (OA) wrote:
Args for FreeBSD + ZFS:
- Limited budget
- We are familiar with managing FreeBSD.
- We are familiar with tuning FreeBSD.
- Licensing model
Args against OpenSolaris + ZFS:
- Hardware compatibility
- Lack of knowledge for tuning and associated costs
Michael DeMan (OA) wrote:
Actually it appears that FreeNAS is forking with planned support for both linux
(we can only speculate on the preferred backing file system) and FreeBSD with
ZFS as preferred backing file system.
In regards to OpenSolaris advocacy for using OpenSolaris vs. FreeBSD, I
Actually it appears that FreeNAS is forking with planned support for both linux
(we can only speculate on the preferred backing file system) and FreeBSD with
ZFS as preferred backing file system.
In regards to OpenSolaris advocacy for using OpenSolaris vs. FreeBSD, I'm all
ears if anybody is b
The only reason I thought this news would be of interest is that the
discussions had some interesting comments. Basically, there is a significant
outcry because zfs was going away. I saw NextentaOS and EON mentioned several
times as the path to go.
Seem that there is some opportunity for Open
10 matches
Mail list logo