Slashdot Mirror


Native ZFS Is Coming To Linux Next Month

An anonymous reader writes "Phoronix is reporting that an Indian technology company has been porting the ZFS filesystem to Linux and will be releasing it next month as a native kernel module without a dependence on FUSE. 'In terms of how native ZFS for Linux is being handled by this Indian company, they are releasing their ported ZFS code under the Common Development & Distribution License and will not be attempting to go for mainline integration. Instead, this company will just be releasing their CDDL source-code as a build-able kernel module for users and ensuring it does not use any GPL-only symbols where there would be license conflicts. KQ Infotech also seems confident that Oracle will not attempt to take any legal action against them for this work.'"

4 of 273 comments (clear)

  1. Good Article by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, really. I had a bunch of questions going in, and they were all answered. This is rare enough to warrant a shout out to Michael Larabel.

    I disagree with some of his subjective claims like x86_64 being a substantive limitation or ZFS on Linux remaining niche (I guess that depends on how you define the niche...) but he got the national lab project, the zpool version, the Oracle (nee Sun) patent problem. Kudos.

    FreeBSD 9 is probably where ZFS will wind up finding a proper home, I'm guessing.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  2. If it comes out and works well by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seems a little early to be putting faith in that. It's feature list looks good, on par with other modern desktop file systems like HFS+ and NTFS. However it is currently unstable. When will that be fixed? Who knows? Maybe it moved full steam ahead and we have a stable, capable file system next month. Maybe the project loses steam and languishes and 4 years from now it is still "unstable" and "coming soon."

    You can't really say how well it'll work until there is stable code to test. Remember designing a file system isn't the real hard part. I'm not saying it is trivial work or that it is unimportant but it is by far the easier part of all this. You can write out a specification that sounds great on paper, but then you have to implement it. That is the much harder part. You have to make it fast, stable, not corrupt data, able to do everything it should and so on.

    This is part of the reason why NTFS on Linux has been so tricky. It is actually pretty well documented in the Windows Internals book, and other places, but it is a complex file system. FAT, on the other hand, is real simple and thus not hard to implement.

    As an example you can look at driver sized. The NTFS driver in Windows is 1.6MB. The FAT driver, on the other hand which supports multiple versions of FAT, is only 200k. The NTFS kernel driver is one of the very largest in the system, only the ATi video driver (much larger) and TCP/IP stack (a bit larger) are bigger than it on my system.

    So we'll see what happens with btrfs. As of late, there's not been much activity. The last version update was June 2009. Maybe they are rolling up final testing for production release, or maybe things have slowed down and release is not near. We'll just have to wait and see, but it is foolish to believe this will be the Next Big Thing(tm) at this point.

  3. Re:Freedom ain't free by coerciblegerm · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, Sun used the CDDL because they hate the restrictions on GPL. The sharing issues go both ways, Sun wanted to keep some ownership. It's not like the BSD license exists just to spite GPL.

    This is the third time I've seen someone post something to this effect in the past week. I smell a smear campaign. Nonetheless, I'm calling BS here. Daneese Cooper, one of the individuals who helped draft the CDDL, stated that they based the CDDL on the MPL "partially because it is GPL incompatible. That was part of the design when they released OpenSolaris." It was made deliberately GPL-incompatible, but this has nothing to do with 'restrictions' in the GPL.

  4. Can I remove a disk from it yet? by Daffy+Duck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=131604
    http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=270957

    Long story short: disk pools in ZFS can only grow, so don't make any mistakes unless you can afford to do a full dump and restore. Sun had been "working on" this for years. Anyone heard any news lately?