Sponsors
Sponsor Products
btrfs deprecated in RHEL 7.4
posted by Jean-Francois Panisset  on Aug. 16, 2017, 5:05 p.m. (1 month, 3 days ago)
24 Responses     0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/16/red_hat_banishes_btrfs_from_rhel/ https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/7.4_Release_Notes/chap-Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-7.4_Release_Notes-Deprecated_Functionality.html So given the influence of RHEL / CentOS in our industry, I'm guessing that we won't be building btrfs servers any time soon... JF To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

Thread Tags:
  discuss-at-studiosysadmins 

Response from Ben De Luca @ Sept. 8, 2017, 11 a.m.
well, we asked to buy support for the os, and they came to try and sell us some thing I dont want.
On 7 September 2017 at 23:04, Peter Smith <peter.smith@framestore.com> wrote:
_If_ I was a salesdroid I know what I'd be doing ...
On 7 Sep 2017 21:40, "William Sandler" <william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com> wrote:
I don't want to speculate but they could be under pressure from sales managers not to mention it considering they sell the ZS systems. The annual support forOracle Solaris Premier Subscription for Non-Oracle Hardware (1-4 socket server) is only $1,000 whereas a ZS4-2 configured for a 3D team is $100K+.
https://shop.oracle.com/apex/f?p=DSTORE:PRODUCT:::NO:RP,6:P6_LPI:27242443094470222098916

Inline image 1


William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
they told me that wasn't possible Bill
On 6 September 2017 at 15:37, William Sandler <william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com> wrote:
Ben not sure I fully understand you but they do support ZFS on an OS without having to purchase a "ZS" unit.
As long as you purchase hardware on their HCL, you can purchase Solaris and ZFS support.

William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
So I talked to Oracle about their storage on the back of this, the only thing they had to offer was a NAS. The presales guy was a from another storage vendor.
The takeaway was we put so much Cache in our system you can use slow disks because no one could ever fill it up. It felt like talking to netapp. Just throw away everything you own and start again.... pretty disappointing, I thought they were actually supporting ZFS on some OS but no.I did however get free coffee so it wasnt a complete loss.

On 28 August 2017 at 02:48, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
More on BtrFS:

https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their
releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project,
with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind.

Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current
stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into
that level of insanity).

Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely
CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result).

Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with
legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Anonymous @ Sept. 7, 2017, 5:05 p.m.
_If_ I was a salesdroid I know what I'd be doing ...
On 7 Sep 2017 21:40, "William Sandler" <william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com> wrote:
I don't want to speculate but they could be under pressure from sales managers not to mention it considering they sell the ZS systems. The annual support forOracle Solaris Premier Subscription for Non-Oracle Hardware (1-4 socket server) is only $1,000 whereas a ZS4-2 configured for a 3D team is $100K+.
https://shop.oracle.com/apex/f?p=DSTORE:PRODUCT:::NO:RP,6:P6_LPI:27242443094470222098916

Inline image 1


William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
they told me that wasn't possible Bill
On 6 September 2017 at 15:37, William Sandler <william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com> wrote:
Ben not sure I fully understand you but they do support ZFS on an OS without having to purchase a "ZS" unit.
As long as you purchase hardware on their HCL, you can purchase Solaris and ZFS support.

William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
So I talked to Oracle about their storage on the back of this, the only thing they had to offer was a NAS. The presales guy was a from another storage vendor.
The takeaway was we put so much Cache in our system you can use slow disks because no one could ever fill it up. It felt like talking to netapp. Just throw away everything you own and start again.... pretty disappointing, I thought they were actually supporting ZFS on some OS but no.I did however get free coffee so it wasnt a complete loss.

On 28 August 2017 at 02:48, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
More on BtrFS:

https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their
releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project,
with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind.

Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current
stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into
that level of insanity).

Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely
CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result).

Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with
legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from William Sandler @ Sept. 7, 2017, 4:45 p.m.
I don't want to speculate but they could be under pressure from sales managers not to mention it considering they sell the ZS systems. The annual support forOracle Solaris Premier Subscription for Non-Oracle Hardware (1-4 socket server) is only $1,000 whereas a ZS4-2 configured for a 3D team is $100K+.
https://shop.oracle.com/apex/f?p=DSTORE:PRODUCT:::NO:RP,6:P6_LPI:27242443094470222098916

Inline image 1


William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
they told me that wasn't possible Bill
On 6 September 2017 at 15:37, William Sandler <william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com> wrote:
Ben not sure I fully understand you but they do support ZFS on an OS without having to purchase a "ZS" unit.
As long as you purchase hardware on their HCL, you can purchase Solaris and ZFS support.

William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
So I talked to Oracle about their storage on the back of this, the only thing they had to offer was a NAS. The presales guy was a from another storage vendor.
The takeaway was we put so much Cache in our system you can use slow disks because no one could ever fill it up. It felt like talking to netapp. Just throw away everything you own and start again.... pretty disappointing, I thought they were actually supporting ZFS on some OS but no.I did however get free coffee so it wasnt a complete loss.

On 28 August 2017 at 02:48, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
More on BtrFS:

https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their
releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project,
with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind.

Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current
stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into
that level of insanity).

Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely
CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result).

Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with
legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Ben De Luca @ Sept. 7, 2017, 11:50 a.m.
they told me that wasn't possible Bill
On 6 September 2017 at 15:37, William Sandler <william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com> wrote:
Ben not sure I fully understand you but they do support ZFS on an OS without having to purchase a "ZS" unit.
As long as you purchase hardware on their HCL, you can purchase Solaris and ZFS support.

William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
So I talked to Oracle about their storage on the back of this, the only thing they had to offer was a NAS. The presales guy was a from another storage vendor.
The takeaway was we put so much Cache in our system you can use slow disks because no one could ever fill it up. It felt like talking to netapp. Just throw away everything you own and start again.... pretty disappointing, I thought they were actually supporting ZFS on some OS but no.I did however get free coffee so it wasnt a complete loss.

On 28 August 2017 at 02:48, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
More on BtrFS:

https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their
releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project,
with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind.

Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current
stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into
that level of insanity).

Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely
CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result).

Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with
legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from William Sandler @ Sept. 6, 2017, 9:40 a.m.
Ben not sure I fully understand you but they do support ZFS on an OS without having to purchase a "ZS" unit.
As long as you purchase hardware on their HCL, you can purchase Solaris and ZFS support.

William Sandler
All Things Media, LLC
william.sandler@allthingsmedia.com
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
So I talked to Oracle about their storage on the back of this, the only thing they had to offer was a NAS. The presales guy was a from another storage vendor.
The takeaway was we put so much Cache in our system you can use slow disks because no one could ever fill it up. It felt like talking to netapp. Just throw away everything you own and start again.... pretty disappointing, I thought they were actually supporting ZFS on some OS but no.I did however get free coffee so it wasnt a complete loss.

On 28 August 2017 at 02:48, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
More on BtrFS:

https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their
releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project,
with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind.

Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current
stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into
that level of insanity).

Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely
CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result).

Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with
legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Ben De Luca @ Sept. 6, 2017, 1:05 a.m.
So I talked to Oracle about their storage on the back of this, the only thing they had to offer was a NAS. The presales guy was a from another storage vendor.
The takeaway was we put so much Cache in our system you can use slow disks because no one could ever fill it up. It felt like talking to netapp. Just throw away everything you own and start again.... pretty disappointing, I thought they were actually supporting ZFS on some OS but no.I did however get free coffee so it wasnt a complete loss.

On 28 August 2017 at 02:48, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
More on BtrFS:

https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their
releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project,
with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind.

Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current
stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into
that level of insanity).

Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely
CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result).

Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with
legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Mons @ Aug. 27, 2017, 8:50 p.m.
More on BtrFS: https://www.suse.com/communities/blog/butter-bei-die-fische/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/ SuSE continue to target BtrFS as a first class citizen in their releases. They are also the current leader in commits to the project, with Oracle and Fujitsu (both large storage vendors) close behind. Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora all also continue to support it in current stable and development releases. (And Arch/Gentoo too, if you're into that level of insanity). Definitely not dead, just no longer supported in RHEL (and likely CentOS/ScientificLinux as a result). Now, if they could just get swap volumes working, I could be done with legacy DOS partitions and LVM forever. -Dan -- This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the author and delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you have received this email in error. To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Rob Giltrap @ Aug. 21, 2017, 10:55 p.m.
On 8/21/2017 7:07 PM, Dan Mons wrote: > On 21 August 2017 at 16:10, Ben De Luca wrote: >> Are they supporting the hardware and the software? > For the various "ZS" units, yes. Worth giving their presales folk a > call if you're interested. They're all ex-Sun guys, so they're a bit > more oldschool in their attitude, which I appreciated. Nice to talk > to people who actually grok storage and *nix (both separately and > together). > Thanks for the kind comments Dan. If any of you are interested in talking to someone at Oracle and you don't have a local contact, feel free to ask me and I can direct you to the right person in your area (i.e; the experienced pre-sales guys who can actually understand what you're asking). To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Mons @ Aug. 21, 2017, 3:10 a.m.
On 21 August 2017 at 16:10, Ben De Luca wrote: > Are they supporting the hardware and the software? For the various "ZS" units, yes. Worth giving their presales folk a call if you're interested. They're all ex-Sun guys, so they're a bit more oldschool in their attitude, which I appreciated. Nice to talk to people who actually grok storage and *nix (both separately and together). -Dan -- This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the author and delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you have received this email in error. To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Ben De Luca @ Aug. 21, 2017, 2:15 a.m.
Are they supporting the hardware and the software?


On 21 August 2017 at 03:16, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
On 18 August 2017 at 17:28, julian firminger <justdigitalfilm@gmail.com> wrote:
> That must restrict you for commercial array/clusters right?

I'm somewhat more bloody minded than most. But, yes, in 2017 if
you're not verifying data from top to toe at every operation, I don't
want your "solution". Data on disk is literally our work, our
product, and our financial success. I put quite a bit of value in the
integrity of that over and above other flashy marketing guff.

On 19 August 2017 at 19:24, Ben De Luca <bdeluca@gmail.com> wrote:
> dont suppose you would share roughly what oracle wants for their
> software/support?

Not on a public mailing list. But I can say that Oracle do a good job
of offering sane support costs from year 4 and onward, which is
something other storage vendors are historically terrible at.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Mons @ Aug. 20, 2017, 9:20 p.m.
On 18 August 2017 at 17:28, julian firminger wrote: > That must restrict you for commercial array/clusters right? I'm somewhat more bloody minded than most. But, yes, in 2017 if you're not verifying data from top to toe at every operation, I don't want your "solution". Data on disk is literally our work, our product, and our financial success. I put quite a bit of value in the integrity of that over and above other flashy marketing guff. On 19 August 2017 at 19:24, Ben De Luca wrote: > dont suppose you would share roughly what oracle wants for their > software/support? Not on a public mailing list. But I can say that Oracle do a good job of offering sane support costs from year 4 and onward, which is something other storage vendors are historically terrible at. -Dan -- This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the author and delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you have received this email in error. To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Jean-Francois Panisset @ Aug. 19, 2017, 3:55 p.m.
Spectrum Scale aka GPFS I would imagine. JF On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Ben De Luca wrote: > what ibm solution are you talking about? > > > > On 18 August 2017 at 09:28, julian firminger > wrote: >> >> Hey Dan, >> >> That must restrict you for commercial array/clusters right? Oracle or IBM >> seem to be the only two that are touting that on systems useful in our >> space. (EMC have it on VNX for instance, not useful to us). >> >> Julian Firminger >> >> Senior Systems Administrator >> United Broadcast Facilities >> Amsterdam, The Netherlands >> >> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Dan Mons >> wrote: >>> >>> On 17 August 2017 at 21:51, Peter Smith >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi Dan >>> > >>> > Are you still using Gluster? Or have you moved to something less >>> > interesting? ;-) >>> >>> Hey Pete, >>> >>> Gluster was fun, but we had to move on. Our storage requirements grew >>> 8000% in 5 years, and Gluster served nicely as a stepping stone in the >>> middle. >>> >>> These days we're on Oracle ZS3-2 ZFS arrays. Definitely "less >>> interesting" from an R&D point of view (very much plug and play). But >>> that also means "less interesting" from a "phone calls at 2am" point >>> of view too, so that's not a terrible thing. :) >>> >>> From 2017 onwards, I've mandated block level checksumming as a >>> mandatory feature for any storage we put in. Any storage vendor who >>> doesn't understand why that's needed isn't worth your dollars, IMHO. >>> We still get calls from folks trying to sell us on shiny graphs, when >>> my real concern is the integrity of the data as we move into multi-PB >>> workloads. >>> >>> -Dan >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended >>> recipient. >>> If you have received this email in error please notify the author and >>> delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the >>> author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or >>> use >>> is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views >>> expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless >>> specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting >>> Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is >>> virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it >>> is >>> virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or >>> damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email >>> may >>> contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you >>> have received this email in error. >>> >>> To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to >>> mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to >> mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to > mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Ben De Luca @ Aug. 19, 2017, 5:25 a.m.
what ibm solution are you talking about?


On 18 August 2017 at 09:28, julian firminger <justdigitalfilm@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Dan,
That must restrict you for commercial array/clusters right? Oracle or IBM seem to be the only two that are touting that on systems useful in our space. (EMC have it on VNX for instance, not useful to us).

Julian Firminger

Senior Systems AdministratorUnited Broadcast FacilitiesAmsterdam, The Netherlands

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
On 17 August 2017 at 21:51, Peter Smith <peter.smith@framestore.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Dan
>
> Are you still using Gluster? Or have you moved to something less interesting? ;-)

Hey Pete,

Gluster was fun, but we had to move on. Our storage requirements grew
8000% in 5 years, and Gluster served nicely as a stepping stone in the
middle.

These days we're on Oracle ZS3-2 ZFS arrays. Definitely "less
interesting" from an R&D point of view (very much plug and play). But
that also means "less interesting" from a "phone calls at 2am" point
of view too, so that's not a terrible thing. :)

>From 2017 onwards, I've mandated block level checksumming as a
mandatory feature for any storage we put in. Any storage vendor who
doesn't understand why that's needed isn't worth your dollars, IMHO.
We still get calls from folks trying to sell us on shiny graphs, when
my real concern is the integrity of the data as we move into multi-PB
workloads.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Julian Firminger @ Aug. 18, 2017, 3:30 a.m.
Hey Dan,
That must restrict you for commercial array/clusters right? Oracle or IBM seem to be the only two that are touting that on systems useful in our space. (EMC have it on VNX for instance, not useful to us).

Julian Firminger

Senior Systems AdministratorUnited Broadcast FacilitiesAmsterdam, The Netherlands

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
On 17 August 2017 at 21:51, Peter Smith <peter.smith@framestore.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Dan
>
> Are you still using Gluster? Or have you moved to something less interesting? ;-)

Hey Pete,

Gluster was fun, but we had to move on. Our storage requirements grew
8000% in 5 years, and Gluster served nicely as a stepping stone in the
middle.

These days we're on Oracle ZS3-2 ZFS arrays. Definitely "less
interesting" from an R&D point of view (very much plug and play). But
that also means "less interesting" from a "phone calls at 2am" point
of view too, so that's not a terrible thing. :)

>From 2017 onwards, I've mandated block level checksumming as a
mandatory feature for any storage we put in. Any storage vendor who
doesn't understand why that's needed isn't worth your dollars, IMHO.
We still get calls from folks trying to sell us on shiny graphs, when
my real concern is the integrity of the data as we move into multi-PB
workloads.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Mons @ Aug. 17, 2017, 8:10 p.m.
On 17 August 2017 at 21:51, Peter Smith wrote: > > Hi Dan > > Are you still using Gluster? Or have you moved to something less interesting? ;-) Hey Pete, Gluster was fun, but we had to move on. Our storage requirements grew 8000% in 5 years, and Gluster served nicely as a stepping stone in the middle. These days we're on Oracle ZS3-2 ZFS arrays. Definitely "less interesting" from an R&D point of view (very much plug and play). But that also means "less interesting" from a "phone calls at 2am" point of view too, so that's not a terrible thing. :) >From 2017 onwards, I've mandated block level checksumming as a mandatory feature for any storage we put in. Any storage vendor who doesn't understand why that's needed isn't worth your dollars, IMHO. We still get calls from folks trying to sell us on shiny graphs, when my real concern is the integrity of the data as we move into multi-PB workloads. -Dan -- This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the author and delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you have received this email in error. To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Anonymous @ Aug. 17, 2017, 7:55 a.m.
Hi Dan

Are you still using Gluster? Or have you moved to something less interesting? ;-)

On 17 August 2017 at 04:13, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
There are several posts around the Intertubes explaining what's going
on, direct from RHEL employees. BtrFS is not dead nor dying. In
short:

RHEL moves slow, on purpose. It's up to RHEL devs to backport new
stuff to their old kernel, which is sometimes difficult.

BtrFS moves fast. Literally rebased on each new kernel that comes out
(and if you follow these things, the kernel is moving damned fast
lately).

RHEL have no BtrFS devs in house. RHEL has lots of XFS devs in house.
XFS is moving slow (it's old, yo). Thus, RHEL are looking at merging
XFS, device mapper, and a bit of Rust code to make something roughly
equivalent from a volume management point of view (but missing the
good stuff like block checksumming that matters more, but everyone
seems to forget, including Apple and their APFS).

Once BtrFS slows down and stabilises, RHEL will likely pick it up
again. Until then, use a faster moving distro if you want BtrFS.
We've all but dumped RHEL/CentOS in favour of UbuntuLTS with the HWE
kernels. It's a nice mix of stability but with features that aren't a
decade old. We're running BtrFS as our standard file system on
single-drive systems (including desktops) and small RAID10 NAS units,
and it works very well. Free snapshotting (including integrated into
APT for auto-snapshot during package installs/upgrades), compression,
and checksumming. BtrFS RAID5/6 is still broken, but folks are
working on fixing it.

For ZFS - no, you can't legally ship compiled/linked CDDL code in the
GPL Linux kernel. That's against the rules. Ubuntu do it, but
they're legally wrong. Oracle's lack of desire to chase them in the
courts doesn't make it right. DKMS-style "ship the code and a wrapper
to compile it in at the client side" is the right way to handle that
sort of "conflicting open source license" stuff.

ZFS vs BtrFS is a whole other discussion. They're quite different on
important items, and one doesn't necessarily trump the other in every
use case. ZFS, for all its awesomeness, has a few flaws that new
things like BtrFS and bcachefs are fixing via better design.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe



--
Framestore Peter Smith Senior Systems Engineer
London New York Los Angeles Chicago Montral
T+44 (0)20 7344 8000 M+44 (0)7816 123009
19-23 Wells Street, London W1T 3PQ
Twitter Facebook framestore.com
https://www.framestore.com/

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Anonymous @ Aug. 17, 2017, 6:20 a.m.
Dan,
Just wanted to thank you for the insightful and informative post.
As someone who now has sole responsibility for a serious amount of storage,it's great to get a perspective from someone who is in the trenches with this stuff.
All the best,Mamading
Mamading Ceesay
Systems Administrator
VISION3 Ltd


On 17 August 2017 at 04:13, Dan Mons <dmons@cuttingedge.com.au> wrote:
There are several posts around the Intertubes explaining what's going
on, direct from RHEL employees. BtrFS is not dead nor dying. In
short:

RHEL moves slow, on purpose. It's up to RHEL devs to backport new
stuff to their old kernel, which is sometimes difficult.

BtrFS moves fast. Literally rebased on each new kernel that comes out
(and if you follow these things, the kernel is moving damned fast
lately).

RHEL have no BtrFS devs in house. RHEL has lots of XFS devs in house.
XFS is moving slow (it's old, yo). Thus, RHEL are looking at merging
XFS, device mapper, and a bit of Rust code to make something roughly
equivalent from a volume management point of view (but missing the
good stuff like block checksumming that matters more, but everyone
seems to forget, including Apple and their APFS).

Once BtrFS slows down and stabilises, RHEL will likely pick it up
again. Until then, use a faster moving distro if you want BtrFS.
We've all but dumped RHEL/CentOS in favour of UbuntuLTS with the HWE
kernels. It's a nice mix of stability but with features that aren't a
decade old. We're running BtrFS as our standard file system on
single-drive systems (including desktops) and small RAID10 NAS units,
and it works very well. Free snapshotting (including integrated into
APT for auto-snapshot during package installs/upgrades), compression,
and checksumming. BtrFS RAID5/6 is still broken, but folks are
working on fixing it.

For ZFS - no, you can't legally ship compiled/linked CDDL code in the
GPL Linux kernel. That's against the rules. Ubuntu do it, but
they're legally wrong. Oracle's lack of desire to chase them in the
courts doesn't make it right. DKMS-style "ship the code and a wrapper
to compile it in at the client side" is the right way to handle that
sort of "conflicting open source license" stuff.

ZFS vs BtrFS is a whole other discussion. They're quite different on
important items, and one doesn't necessarily trump the other in every
use case. ZFS, for all its awesomeness, has a few flaws that new
things like BtrFS and bcachefs are fixing via better design.

-Dan

--


This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient.
If you have received this email in error please notify the author and
delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the
author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use
is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views
expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless
specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting
Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is
virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is
virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or
damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may
contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you
have received this email in error.

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Mons @ Aug. 16, 2017, 11:15 p.m.
There are several posts around the Intertubes explaining what's going on, direct from RHEL employees. BtrFS is not dead nor dying. In short: RHEL moves slow, on purpose. It's up to RHEL devs to backport new stuff to their old kernel, which is sometimes difficult. BtrFS moves fast. Literally rebased on each new kernel that comes out (and if you follow these things, the kernel is moving damned fast lately). RHEL have no BtrFS devs in house. RHEL has lots of XFS devs in house. XFS is moving slow (it's old, yo). Thus, RHEL are looking at merging XFS, device mapper, and a bit of Rust code to make something roughly equivalent from a volume management point of view (but missing the good stuff like block checksumming that matters more, but everyone seems to forget, including Apple and their APFS). Once BtrFS slows down and stabilises, RHEL will likely pick it up again. Until then, use a faster moving distro if you want BtrFS. We've all but dumped RHEL/CentOS in favour of UbuntuLTS with the HWE kernels. It's a nice mix of stability but with features that aren't a decade old. We're running BtrFS as our standard file system on single-drive systems (including desktops) and small RAID10 NAS units, and it works very well. Free snapshotting (including integrated into APT for auto-snapshot during package installs/upgrades), compression, and checksumming. BtrFS RAID5/6 is still broken, but folks are working on fixing it. For ZFS - no, you can't legally ship compiled/linked CDDL code in the GPL Linux kernel. That's against the rules. Ubuntu do it, but they're legally wrong. Oracle's lack of desire to chase them in the courts doesn't make it right. DKMS-style "ship the code and a wrapper to compile it in at the client side" is the right way to handle that sort of "conflicting open source license" stuff. ZFS vs BtrFS is a whole other discussion. They're quite different on important items, and one doesn't necessarily trump the other in every use case. ZFS, for all its awesomeness, has a few flaws that new things like BtrFS and bcachefs are fixing via better design. -Dan -- This email is confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error please notify the author and delete it immediately. This email is not to be distributed without the author's written consent. Unauthorised forwarding, printing, copying or use is strictly prohibited and may be a breach of copyright. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender unless specifically stated to be the views of Cutting Edge Post Pty Ltd (Cutting Edge). Although this email has been sent in the belief that it is virus-free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free. No responsibility is accepted by Cutting Edge for any loss or damage arising in any way from receipt or use of this email. This email may contain legally privileged information and privilege is not waived if you have received this email in error. To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Ben De Luca @ Aug. 16, 2017, 10:05 p.m.
so ceph has moved away from btrfs? it was once dependent on it?
On 17 August 2017 at 00:40, Brian Krusic <brian@krusic.com> wrote:
Hi,
Well actually OpenZFS is CDDL where as Linux is GNU so it's not so much a corporate beef, but a free software standards incompatibility.
Recall that ZFS branched when Oracle bought Sun. So we have the free version and the fee version of ZFS.
At least thats what I know, and I may be wrong.
Any one? - Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:38 PM, Bryce Evans <bryceevans@gmail.com> wrote:
Redhat continues to support/develop XFS, as that's what their filesystem team has expertise in.
And due to licensing issues(or maybe just corporate beef), we probably won't see ZFS ship in rhel any time soon either. Ironically oracle recently commited preliminary dedup support to XFS.
XFS forever!
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Brian Krusic <brian@krusic.com> wrote:
Hi,
Wow that was fast.
Not too long ago there was talk about Btrfs replacing ZFS.
And XFS is still around, pretty cool.
- Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Dan Young <dan.robert.young@gmail.com> wrote:
RIP I can't believe it's not butter fs To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Brian Krusic @ Aug. 16, 2017, 6:40 p.m.
Hi,
Well actually OpenZFS is CDDL where as Linux is GNU so it's not so much a corporate beef, but a free software standards incompatibility.
Recall that ZFS branched when Oracle bought Sun.  So we have the free version and the fee version of ZFS.
At least thats what I know, and I may be wrong.
Any one?  - Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:38 PM, Bryce Evans <bryceevans@gmail.com> wrote:
Redhat continues to support/develop XFS, as that's what their filesystem team has expertise in.
And due to licensing issues(or maybe just corporate beef), we probably won't see ZFS ship in rhel any time soon either. Ironically oracle recently commited preliminary dedup support to XFS .
XFS forever!
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Brian Krusic <brian@krusic.com> wrote:
Hi,
Wow that was fast.
Not too long ago there was talk about Btrfs replacing ZFS.
And XFS is still around, pretty cool.
- Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Dan Young <dan.robert.young@gmail.com> wrote:
RIP I can't believe it's not butter fs  To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe

To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Young @ Aug. 16, 2017, 5:45 p.m.
I, for one, enjoy our XFS overlords. Good enough for standardfs, good enough for prod. (also I hate Sun with every passion available since UltraSparc IIe)
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bryce Evans <bryceevans@gmail.com> wrote:
Redhat continues to support/develop XFS, as that's what their filesystem team has expertise in.
And due to licensing issues(or maybe just corporate beef), we probably won't see ZFS ship in rhel any time soon either. Ironically oracle recently commited preliminary dedup support to XFS.
XFS forever!
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Brian Krusic <brian@krusic.com> wrote:
Hi,
Wow that was fast.
Not too long ago there was talk about Btrfs replacing ZFS.
And XFS is still around, pretty cool.
- Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Dan Young <dan.robert.young@gmail.com> wrote:
RIP I can't believe it's not butter fs To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Bryce Evans @ Aug. 16, 2017, 5:40 p.m.
Redhat continues to support/develop XFS, as that's what their filesystem team has expertise in.
And due to licensing issues(or maybe just corporate beef), we probably won't see ZFS ship in rhel any time soon either. Ironically oracle recently commited preliminary dedup support to XFS.
XFS forever!
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Brian Krusic <brian@krusic.com> wrote:
Hi,
Wow that was fast.
Not too long ago there was talk about Btrfs replacing ZFS.
And XFS is still around, pretty cool.
- Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Dan Young <dan.robert.young@gmail.com> wrote:
RIP I can't believe it's not butter fs To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Dan Young @ Aug. 16, 2017, 5:25 p.m.
RIP I can't believe it's not butter fs

0 Plus One's     0 Comments  
   

Response from Brian Krusic @ Aug. 16, 2017, 5:25 p.m.
Hi,
Wow that was fast.
Not too long ago there was talk about Btrfs replacing ZFS.
And XFS is still around, pretty cool.
- Brian
Every day is a gift Thats why they call it the present"
On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Dan Young <dan.robert.young@gmail.com> wrote:
RIP I can't believe it's not butter fs  To unsubscribe from the list send a blank e-mail to mailto:studiosysadmins-discuss-request@studiosysadmins.com?subject=unsubscribe


0 Plus One's     0 Comments