From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 25 11:48:46 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D79B0106566B for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:48:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dfunk6@cox.net) Received: from eastrmmtao105.cox.net (eastrmmtao105.cox.net [68.230.240.47]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8092F8FC1B for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:48:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastrmimpo01.cox.net ([68.1.16.119]) by eastrmmtao105.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100925114847.BMHF14030.eastrmmtao105.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 07:48:47 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([68.0.73.73]) by eastrmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id Azol1f0051asDc402zolCT; Sat, 25 Sep 2010 07:48:45 -0400 X-VR-Score: -180.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=Ve2E6xT+YqPv90BJPa9Z7cy3eVbY/842O+E6p2NWdSs= c=1 sm=1 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=cldQwrSUzPq7T4OJ8kWhDA==:17 a=XQsCswjdAAAA:8 a=ffqntfn1ssL4Pu6pRbQA:9 a=qKOUrZETZVd47kN20PYA:7 a=U9ML7oi1rQiS8Zh-lBgfO7NPEGwA:4 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=cldQwrSUzPq7T4OJ8kWhDA==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Authentication-Results: cox.net; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=dfunk6@cox.net Message-ID: <4C9DE19E.7000802@cox.net> Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 06:48:46 -0500 From: Derek Funk User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100914 Thunderbird/3.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <4C9D0499.3050908@cox.net> <4C9D146C.10009@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4C9DA5AA.4020606@boosten.org> <4C9DA891.7030706@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4C9DA891.7030706@infracaninophile.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100924-1, 09/24/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: Filesystems X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:48:46 -0000 On 9/25/2010 2:45 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 25/09/2010 08:32:58, Peter Boosten wrote: > >> On 24-9-2010 23:13, Matthew Seaman wrote: >> >>> On 24/09/2010 21:05:45, Derek Funk wrote: >>> >>>> There was a post some time ago someone was complaining that FreeBSD >>>> still uses and archaic filesystem and not a new FS like ext4. Some >>>> replied, seeming like a code contributor, with a very sounded reply. >>>> What is that reply? >>>> >>> ZFS >>> >>> or words to that effect. Linux has nothing comparable. >>> >>> >> http://www.osnews.com/story/23416/Native_ZFS_Port_for_Linux >> >> :-) >> > Yes. Quoting that very page: > > "There's still some major work to be done, so this is not > production-ready code. The ZFS Posix Layer has not been implemented yet, > therefore mounting file systems is not yet possible; direct database > access, however, is. Supposedly, KQ Infotech is working on this, but it > has been rather quiet around those parts for a while now." > > What use is a filesystem you can't mount? It might be a work in > progress, but it isn't anywhere near done yet. The fact that there is > so much enthusiasm for porting the FS despite the license > incompatability just underlines the basic contention, that Linux has > nothing comparable. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > > Thank you both for the replies. I think I remember the response from a time ago as he stated something like: FreeBSD primary focus is server mostly Web and Router builds and a newer pooling journalize FS does not fit with FreeBSD's core of being the most stable and reliable while maintaining security. Derek