Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 21:38:49 -0600 From: "illoai@gmail.com" <illoai@gmail.com> To: "Christian Baer" <christian.baer@uni-dortmund.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Looking for a Text on ZFS Message-ID: <d7195cff0802021938o3d9d8316h5aead7e1ac710e75@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <fo2f26$1l2q$1@nermal.rz1.convenimus.net> References: <fo2f26$1l2q$1@nermal.rz1.convenimus.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/02/2008, Christian Baer <christian.baer@uni-dortmund.de> wrote: > Hello people! > > Can anyone give me a link to a text on ZFS that tells me why I might want > to use that instead of FFS? I don't want to start a discussion which is > better, just a comparison, as I assume that the two are not designed to do > the same things. And if possible one that is understandable to people who > don't hack FS-code. :-) http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/harvesting_from_a_troll http://zamwi.com/2007/01/16/why-do-geeks-have-lust-for-zfs/ ZFS ends the microsotf monopoly over our disks. ZFS begins the world as a 128bit dadaspace. Using ZFS fixes allocations and massaging your NAS. The inode is now the wenode. Usaging ZFS will make everything sunnier. Brighter too. Making ZFS the default FS in an FScentric world ends the pesky problems associated with legacy hardware. Building a ZFS nonuplyindirectwenode multiply redundant redundant filesystem makes Kate Miller-Heidke the Well, the best, I think. -- --
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d7195cff0802021938o3d9d8316h5aead7e1ac710e75>