Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 00:26:20 -0400 From: Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com> To: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> Cc: freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Oracle to deny deduplication? Message-ID: <AANLkTi=nwDp-RRvgfQy39DcuyrpqFVdDHGfZU-aDamoX@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1009211418180.12887@freddy.simplesystems.org> References: <AANLkTi=ESqvF77%2Bhswv=4xLS0fNPkyS4ET%2BUVU7fOBrW@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.2.01.1009211418180.12887@freddy.simplesystems.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: >> >> Shortly thereafter I found a nice table (here: >> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/appendixa-1?a=3Dview ) >> >> ... now notice that the official Oracle table lists version 21 of >> zpool as "Reserved" ... this worries me. =A0Is the solution to the >> lawsuit against Sun by NetApp (that Oracle settled) that Oracle burys >> deduplication? =A0This could be bad for people who unbury it. > > I think that this is just because Solaris 10 Update 9 is recently release= d > and deduplication is not considered robust enough for production use yet. > =A0You are looking at a Solaris 10 document. =A0The easy solution was to = simply > mask it out. =A0The deduplication code is likely still active in Solaris = 10 > Update 9 zfs, even if it can't be enabled by it. > > No worries ... Even if you are correct, I'm still quite wary of Oracle's support of ZFS. Oracle is not known as a "nice" entity. But how would that work --- if you update the pool to 23 (22 or 23 is the latest listed there?) then a filesystem with dedup would be read ... but you might not be able to set the attribute? Seems odd. The ZFS implementation of dedup seems so "sensible" ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi=nwDp-RRvgfQy39DcuyrpqFVdDHGfZU-aDamoX>