Hi Darren, I totally agree with you and have raised some of the points mentioned but you have given even more items to pass on. I will update the alias when I hear further.
Many Thanks Roshan ----- Original Message ----- From: Darren J Moffat <darr...@opensolaris.org> Date: Thursday, February 4, 2010 12:42 pm Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS compression on Clearcase To: Roshan Perera <roshan.per...@sun.com> Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > On 04/02/2010 12:13, Roshan Perera wrote: > >Hi Darren, > > > >Thanks - IBM basically haven't test clearcase with ZFS compression > therefore, they don't support currently. Future may change, as such my > customer cannot use compression. I have asked IBM for roadmap info to > find whether/when it will be supported. > > That is FUD generation in my opinion and being overly cautious. The > whole point of the POSIX interfaces to a filesystem is that > applications don't actually care how the filesystem stores their data. > > UFS never had checksums before but ZFS adds those, but that didn't > mean that applications had to be checked because checksums were now > done on the data. > > What if it was the disk drive that was doing the compression ? There > would be similarly no way for the application to actually know that it > is happening. > > What about every other feature we add to ZFS ? Like dedup (which is > a type of compression) - again they app can't tell. Or snapshots - > the app can't tell. > > Thats my opinion though and I know that ISVs can be very cautious > about new features sometimes and overly so when it is far below their > parts of the stack. > > Taking another example it would be like an ISV that supports their > application running over NFS saying they don't support a certain type > of vendors switch in the network because they haven't tested it. > > -- > Darren J Moffat > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
