On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 04:42:24PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Jul 20, Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org> wrote: > > > > > > Again, why? > > > > ZFS is a pretty big one. > > > It is about as stable as BTRFS on Linux, so I do not see either a > > > compelling argument right now. > > BTRFS ? stable ? You must be living in the future. > My point. You must not be a storage administrator. ZFS has been remarkably solid for us on both Solaris and FreeBSD platforms. It's performance is something to be desired, but that can be tuned accordingly. BTRFS exists only to compete with ZFS, and it's got some serious catching up to do. -- . o . o . o . . o o . . . o . . . o . o o o . o . o o . . o o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature