From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 17 05:31:02 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 045081065670
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:31:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dan-freebsd-questions@ourbrains.org)
Received: from ourbrains.org (li48-221.members.linode.com [66.246.76.221])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CC4A8FC0A
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:31:01 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dan-freebsd-questions@ourbrains.org)
Received: (qmail 16867 invoked by uid 1000); 17 Nov 2008 05:04:41 -0000
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:04:41 -0500
From: Dan <dan-freebsd-questions@ourbrains.org>
To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20081117050441.GA16855@ourbrains.org>
Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
References: <20081109174303.GA5146@ourbrains.org>
	<20081109184349.GG51239@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
	<4920D879.3070806@jrv.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4920D879.3070806@jrv.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Subject: Re: Will XFS be adopted
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:31:02 -0000

James R. Van Artsdalen(james-freebsd-fs2@jrv.org)@2008.11.16 20:35:37 -0600:
> ZFS has limitations.
> 
> It is not appropriate for "appliance" applications such as the Soekris
> boxes does due to memory consumption.
YES! In my opinion it's not even appropriate for a machine with 2GB of
RAM. Why waste so much RAM on an FS? Does anyone know? Or is this some
sort of conspiracy to sell more bgger boxes. It's Sun, afterall....

> BTRFS will be another filesystem to watch.  Perhaps foreign filesystems
> could be supported out of ports.  But the fundamental limitation, as was
> said, is that someone has to care enough to do the port.

What kinda bugs me is why FreeBSD hasn't adopted a nice journaling FS
until now. Look at Linux - Reiser, EXT3 and XFS/JFS have been in it for
years. What gives with FreeBSD?