On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 09:52:51PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote: > Are we living in the past? > > In the bad old days, UNIX systems spoke NFS and Windows systems spoke > CIFS. The cost of creating a file system was expensive -- slices, > partitions, etc. > > With ZFS, file systems (datasets) are relatively inexpensive. > > So, are we putting too many constraints into a system (ZFS) which is > busy trying to remove constraints? Is it reasonable to expect that > ZPL is the only kind of "file system" ZFS customers need? Is it high > time for a ZCIFS dataset?
I don't quite understand what you mean. ZPL is just a POSIX layer. It _happens_ to be used not just by the system call layer in Solaris, but also by the SMB and NFS servers, but you could also imagine the SMB and NFS servers using the DMU directly while maintaining on-disk compatibility with the ZPL. Not using the ZPL does not necessitate having a different on-disk format, or different semantics. Now, if you were asking about dataset properties that make a dataset behave more like what Windows expects or more like what Unix expects, that's different, but that wouldn't require junking the ZPL. Nico -- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
