Messages in this thread | | | From | Andreas Happe <> | Subject | Re: what is our answer to ZFS? | Date | Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:16:52 +0100 |
| |
On 2005-11-21, Alfred Brons <alfredbrons@yahoo.com> wrote: > Thanks Paulo! > I wasn't aware of this thread. > > But my question was: do we have similar functionality > in Linux kernel?
>>> Every block is checksummed to prevent silent data corruption, >>> and the data is self-healing in replicated (mirrored or RAID) >>> configurations.
should not be filesystem specific.
>>> ZFS provides unlimited constant-time snapshots and clones. A >>> snapshot is a read-only point-in-time copy of a filesystem, while a >>> clone is a writable copy of a snapshot. Clones provide an extremely >>> space-efficient way to store many copies of mostly-shared data such >>> as workspaces, software installations, and diskless clients.
lvm2 can do those too (with any filesystem that supports resizing). Clones would be the snapshot functionality of lvm2.
>>> ZFS administration is both simple and powerful. The tools are >>> designed from the ground up to eliminate all the traditional >>> headaches relating to managing filesystems. Storage can be added, >>> disks replaced, and data scrubbed with straightforward commands.
lvm2.
>>> Filesystems can be created instantaneously, snapshots and clones >>> taken, native backups made, and a simplified property mechanism >>> allows for setting of quotas, reservations, compression, and more.
excepct per-file compression all thinks should be doable with normal in-kernel fs. per-file compression may be doable with ext2 and special patches, an overlay filesystem or reiser4.
Andreas
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |