On 18 August 2010 21:49, Joerg Schilling
<Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> On 08/18/2010 11:03 AM, Nganon wrote:
> > Clear now, thanks.
> >
> >
> > If you want a robust filesystem, look into ZFS/BTRFS.
> >
> >
> > AFAIK ZFS is unmaintained and BTRFS is not stable, am I wrong?
Why do you believe ZFS is unmaintained?
I was unsure, thats why I asked if I was wrong. My bad.
> Not really. ZFS is only available on Solaris right now. I seem to
> remember it was running on one of the BSD's, too, since it's a matter of
> licensing that is the hurdle of greatest height. I've only played with
> BTRFS on my dev box and the simple workout I gave it did not tax it in
> any way--it worked okay.
ZFS has a very free license. This was the reason, why it could be ported to the
BSDs. So why do you believe there is a "license hurdle"?
Because ZFS is licensed with Sun CDDL, which is incompatible with GNU GPL,
so it cant be distributed with Linux kernel. That's why it is ported to FUSE.
Also note: btrfs now is three years old. ZFS was started aprox. 10 years ago.
For this reason, btrfs is expected to need another 7 years to readh the level
of stability currently seen with ZFS.
ZFS was announced on 2004. So approximately six year, not ten. Besides, things in
computer world do not always work that linearly, you know.