Garrett wrote:
>I don't know about ramifications (though I suspect that a broadening
>error scope would decrease ZFS' ability to isolate and work around
>problematic regions on the media), but one thing I do know. If you use
>FreeBSD disk encryption below ZFS, then you won't be able able to import
>your pools to another implementation -- you will be stuck with FreeBSD.
This is an excellent point. Geli isn't a good option for me, then, though
using
encryption outside of the VM would still work.
>Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained product, have
>you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with OpenSolaris,
>we aren't going anywhere. (Full disclosure: I'm a Nexenta Systems
>employee. :-)
I probably ought to consider other OpenSolaris alternatives, like NexentaStor.
(Though I'd be looking at the free version, not the commercial one: this is
just for personal use, despite how careful I'm being with it. :) ) However
(and
please correct me if I'm wrong), isn't your future still tied to the future of
OpenSolaris? The code is open, of course, but my understanding is that there
isn't the same kind of developer community supporting OpenSolaris itself that
you see with Linux (or even the BSDs).
In other words, if Oracle stops development of OpenSolaris, there wouldn't be
enough developers still working on it to keep it from stagnating. Or are you
saying that you employ enough kernel hackers to keep up even without Oracle?
(I
am admittedly ignorant about the OpenSolaris developer community; this is all
based on others' statements and opinions that I've read.)
Michael
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
