Re: Btrfs development plans

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Ahmed Kamal
<email.ahmedkamal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  But now Oracle can re-license Solaris and merge ZFS with btrfs.
>> Just kidding, I don't think it would be technically feasible.
>>
>
> May I suggest the name "ZbtrFS" :)
> Sorry couldn't resist. On a more serious note though, is there any
> technical benefits that justify continuing to push money in btrfs

Personally, I don't see any. Porting zfs to Linux will cost (quite)
some time and effort, but this is peanuts compared to what's needed to
get btrfs  (no offense meant) to maturity level/feature parity with
zfs. The only thing that could prevent this is CDDL licensing issues
and patent claims from NTAP over zfs snapshots  and other features;
btrfs is free from both.

Regards,
Andrey

> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux