On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyone who follows this list we have seen a number of issues with > Solaris 10 and ZFS from me this week. > > We deployed Solaris 10 for the usual conservative reasons, support and > stability. Most of my my ZFS experience has been with SXCE and I've > seen problems reported and fixed a couple of builds later. The further > SXCE moves ahead of Solaris 10 ZFS, the longer (and probably more > difficult) the task of back porting these fixes will become. > > So my question is, for production servers (x4540) that are primarily SMB > (80%) and NFS (20%) file servers, would you deploy SXCE with native > CIFS support, or Solaris 10/Samba? > > I wouldn't hesitate to go with the former, relying on Live Upgrade to > incorporate fixes rather than patching. Persuading clients may be a > little harder!
At the present time, I would go with Solaris 10. I don't have a problem with SXCE as such (although many recent builds have had some issues - not necessarily with zfs); the problem I do have is with whether SXCE has a sustainable future. Solaris 10 has years of support left in it, but what happens once SXCE is scrapped and you can't update any further? -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
