On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:45:55PM -0800, can you guess? wrote: > > There aren't free alternatives in linux or freebsd > > that do what zfs does, period. > > No one said that there were: the real issue is that there's not much > reason to care, since the available solutions don't need to be
If you don't care, then go off not caring. (Can we declare this thread dead already?) Others seem to care. > *identical* to offer *comparable* value (i.e., they each have > different strengths and weaknesses and the net result yields no clear > winner - much as some of you would like to believe otherwise). Interoperability counts for a lot for some people. Fewer filesystems to learn about can count too. ZFS provides peace of mind that you tell us doesn't matter. And it's actively developed and you and everyone else can see that this is so, and that recent ZFS improvements and others that are in the pipe (and discussed publicly) are very good improvements, which all portends an even better future for ZFS down the line. Whatever you do not like about ZFS today may be fixed tomorrow, except for the parts about it being ZFS, opensource, Sun-developed, ..., the parts that really seem to bother you. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
