I'm not going to discuss the use of ZFS in professional data center scenario, but for other simpler scenarios, ZFS isn't necessarily a bad choice. The data integrity features provided by ZFS is simply outstanding, and is something you do not want to live without after getting used to it. The additional suppport for software RAID makes ZFS the only choice available for anyone on a budget. It's true that ZFS needs more RAM, but that is solved by buying enough RAM. That is far from being a showstopper today.
I don't where you learned that ZFS in poor in performance, but these benchmarks doesn't back up your claim:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...
Can you explain why the ZFS kernel module for Linux sucks compared to "a real, integrated file system driver."?
In my experience, it beats it hell out of btfrs. Maybe it's better in the later kernels (3.16++).
That is a silly statement. There are always someone able to abuse even the safest constructs, so removing any "unsafe" construct is not the solution. Teaching how not to use them, is however, a much better strategy.
Is it really that hard to grasp the concept of evidence? No evidence has been provided, so there is good reason to be skeptical. Such institutions are scared to death when it comes to situations like this. If they can sacrifice someone to prevent any troubles, they might do so just to be on the safe side.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not going to discuss the use of ZFS in professional data center scenario, but for other simpler scenarios, ZFS isn't necessarily a bad choice. The data integrity features provided by ZFS is simply outstanding, and is something you do not want to live without after getting used to it. The additional suppport for software RAID makes ZFS the only choice available for anyone on a budget. It's true that ZFS needs more RAM, but that is solved by buying enough RAM. That is far from being a showstopper today. I don't where you learned that ZFS in poor in performance, but these benchmarks doesn't back up your claim: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...
Can you explain why the ZFS kernel module for Linux sucks compared to "a real, integrated file system driver."? In my experience, it beats it hell out of btfrs. Maybe it's better in the later kernels (3.16++).
So the fact that the bug didn't affect you is an argument for what, exactly?
"GOTO" should never have been allowed in C.
That is a silly statement. There are always someone able to abuse even the safest constructs, so removing any "unsafe" construct is not the solution. Teaching how not to use them, is however, a much better strategy.
Is it really that hard to grasp the concept of evidence? No evidence has been provided, so there is good reason to be skeptical. Such institutions are scared to death when it comes to situations like this. If they can sacrifice someone to prevent any troubles, they might do so just to be on the safe side.
"Because, in open source land, every single difference of opinion ends up being a fork" Observational...yeah, sure.
Did you not know that "letting the end users test it" has been Microsoft's approach for many years for their OSes?