Andrey Kuzmin wrote: <snip> > 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. <snip> There's one thing you're overlooking: the core kernel developers have already stated that ZFS is a "rampant layering violation" and otherwise indicated they do not want ZFS in the Linux kernel, whereas BtrFS has gotten a much more positive response. It may well be that on the /Oracle/ side, the political and technical problems with porting ZFS are smaller than those with finishing BtrFS, but if the kernel developers wouldn't accept it, _any_ money and effort spent on it would be wasted money and effort. -- 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
