On 12-Jun-07, at 1:54 PM, Erblichs wrote:
Group,
Isn't Apple strength really in the non-compute intensive
personal computer / small business environment?
IE, Plug and play.
Thus, even though ZFS is able to work as the default
FS, should it be the default FS for the small system
environment where your average user, wants it more to
work, and cares less about administration issues.
This is exactly why it should be (and surely will be, but evidently
not in 10.5) - as François and others have observed. It's absurd to
claim that people's "Digital Lives" (as sold by Apple) do not deserve
the same protection as some Oracle accounts payable. It has always
bothered me the way this has been oversold: Put your whole life -
music, mail, photos, video, bookmarks, love letters, unfinished novel
- on a single 300GB drive then lose the lot either by bitwise
attrition or catastrophic end of lifespan.
[I believe consumer machines should sell out of the box with 2
mirrored drives (and easy end user procedure to replace). But that's
just me.]
Rewind to the year 2000 and prior, when people would make the same
argument about UNIX: "Apple's stupid for pretending you can put a
best of breed O/S on consumer desktops. It's too complex! It's too
fragile! It's just too damn powerful!" Well, here we are, and they
did it. ZFS will be the same story.
This is how Mr Jobs works. Have vision, will ship: And ZFS is just
the sort of disruptive, generational shift that would catch his
attention.
IMHO.
It/ZFS almost, IMO, needs to check mistakes with configuration
in the first case, where the larger business environment
can have one or more dedicated admins that are more adapt
to config and tuning issues.
UNIX on your grandmother's iMac. Who knew?
--Toby
Mitchell Erblich
----------------
Rich Teer wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Robert Smicinski wrote:
Apple's strength is the desktop, Sun's is the datacenter.
Agreed, to a large extent.
There's no need to have ZFS on the desktop, just as there's no need
to have HFS+ in the datacenter.
I strongly disagree with the first clause of that sentence. There's
no reason why one wouldn't want to have mirrored file systems on a
workstation, or make use of snapshots and clones. All three of those
features are supplied rather handily by ZFS.
ZFS isn't just about easily creating massive pools of data, although
admitedly that is the first feature most people mention.
There is a need to improve ZFS in the datacenter, however, and I
wish
Sun had invested their time in getting dynamic LUN expansion going
instead of working on a port to OS/X.
I have no insider knowledge, but I don't think Sun invested much time
in this. I believe Apple's engineers did most of the work.
--
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member
CEO,
My Online Home Inventory
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
