On Sat, Apr 18 at 9:56, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Ian Collins wrote:
Nice sentiment, but not a lot of use if they want people to use the
module! ZFS while definitely the result of "outside the box" thinking
it can be used on all exiting hardware. How far would it have
progressed if it had required specialised hardware?
It seems wrong to use a SCSI or SATA stack to access a hardware device
like this. We could have used SCSI or SATA to access our video card,
but we chose not to because there are more efficient models. Likewise a
new type of "short stack" can be invented along with a new hardware
interface which is otimum for accessing memory-based low-latency
non-volatile devices. This "short stack" can fit under zfs like any
other block-oriented storage device.
What is tall about the SATA stack? There's not THAT much overhead in
SATA, and there's no reason you would need to support any legacy
transfer modes or commands you weren't interested in.
--
Eric D. Mudama
edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
