-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Apple Scuttles ZFS: Community Picks it Up
,----[ Quote ]
| But as with all things open source, there's a
| light at the end of the tunnel. forks have
| already appeared on GitHub, and there are
| attempts to support ZFS with MacFUSE. So if
| you're a die-hard ZFS fan on Mac OS X, there
| may be some hope for you yet.
`----
http://ostatic.com/blog/apple-scuttles-zfs-community-picks-it-up
Recent:
What's missing in Btrfs
,----[ Quote ]
| So, after being completely betrayed[1] by
| Ext4 not once, but twice, I decided to
| evaluate my FS options for /home .
|
| * FAT* are not an option, neither is
| NTFS.
| * Ext2 is primitive and HFS/HFS+ is
| just not Linux.
| * JFS is nice, but (atleast parted)
| doesn't support grow/shrink.
| * I've used XFS before, and found it to
| be more reliable than Ext4. However,
| deleting dirs with thousands of small
| files is too slow (a common operation
| when compiling)
| * ZFS would've been an option if my
| earlier experiences with ZFS-FUSE
| weren't so horrid.
| * Did not even consider NILFS. It's too
| new, and I don't know much about it.
`----
http://bheekly.blogspot.com/2009/10/whats-missing-in-btrfs.html
Buttering Up Linux File Systems
,----[ Quote ]
| Interestingly, BTRFS was initially developed by Oracle (NASDAQ: ORCL) â which
| is acquiring Sun â but is now licensed under the GPL and is thoroughly in the
| open source community, open for contribution from anyone. It is described on
| its own project pages as "a new copy on write file system for Linux aimed at
| implementing advanced features while focusing on fault tolerance, repair and
| easy administration."
`----
http://www.enterprisestorageforum.com/technology/features/article.php/3833321
A short history of btrfs
,----[ Quote ]
| Btrfs is heading for 1.0, a little more than 2 years since the first
| announcement. This is much faster than many file systems veterans - including
| myself - expected, especially given that during most of that time, btrfs had
| only one full-time developer. Btrfs is not ready for production use - that
| is, storing and serving data you would be upset about losing - but it is
| ready for widespread testing - e.g., on your backed-up-nightly laptop, or
| your experimental netbook that you reinstall every few weeks anyway.
`----
http://lwn.net/Articles/342892/
Choosing the right Linux File System Layout using a Top-Bottom Process
,----[ Quote ]
| As you may probably know, Linux supports various filesystems such as ext2,
| ext3, ext4, xfs, reiserfs, jfs among others. Few users really consider this
| part of a system, selecting default options of their distribution's
| installer. In this article, I will give some reasons for a better
| consideration of the file-system and of its layout. I will suggest a
| top-bottom process for the design of a ``smart'' layout that remains as
| stable as possible over time for a given computer usage.
`----
http://www.linuxconfig.org/choosing-the-right-linux-file-system-layout-using-a-top-bottom-process
The Btrfs file system
,----[ Quote ]
| Btrfs, the designated "next generation file system" for Linux, offers a range
| of features that are not available in other Linux file systems â and it's
| nearly ready for production use.
`----
http://www.h-online.com/open/The-Btrfs-file-system--/features/113738
Btrfs v0.19 Brings Some Gains, Some Losses
,----[ Quote ]
| As we shared early on in this article, the Btrfs v0.19 notes mention, "In
| general, v0.19 is a dramatic speed improvement over v0.18 in almost every
| workload." From our Btrfs file-system tests today, this is partially true. We
| encountered several tests where there were indeed hefty speed-ups in
| performance with the Serial ATA 2.0 SSD being tested, but in other tests,
| there was a very evident drop in performance. Specifically, the write
| performance always seemed to be better, but that was not always the case for
| the read performance. There was generally a 14~16% drop in performance when
| this problem occurred. Granted, due to the differing kernels and just not the
| Btrfs difference, this could be attributed to something else within the Linux
| kernel, but nevertheless this does show some signs of problems with the
| newest Linux code.
`----
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_019&num=1
Testing Out The SSD Mode In Btrfs
,----[ Quote ]
| One month ago we provided benchmarks of the Btrfs file-system and found that
| while it contained many features to make it a next-generation Linux
| file-system, its disk performance was rather displeasing. We had found the
| EXT4 file-system ran faster in a number of the tests and even EXT3 and XFS
| had their own advantages. Besides offering features like snapshots and online
| defragmentation, Btrfs has a mode that is optimized for solid-state drives.
| Will the Btrfs SSD mode cause this new Oracle-sponsored file-system to be the
| best for non-rotating media? We have benchmarks in this article, but the
| results may not be what one would expect.
|
| [...]
|
| The Btrfs SSD mode ended out our last test still being slower than not using
| the SSD mount option.
`----
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_ssd_mode&num=1
Btrfs Benchmarks: Btrfs Is Not Yet The Performance King
,----[ Quote ]
| With the release this week of Fedora 11 Preview, which incorporates
| install-time support for the Btrfs file-system into Red Hat's Anaconda
| installer, we have now delivered our first set of benchmark results for this
| next-generation Linux file-system. Through a horde of disk tests we have
| looked at the Btrfs file-system performance and compared it to that of EXT3,
| EXT4, and XFS. While Btrfs does perform well in some areas, it is not yet the
| performance king for Linux file-systems. As our results show, in some tests
| it even has a hard time competing with the incremental EXT4 file-system.
`----
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_benchmarks&num=1
Linux Don't Need No Stinkin' ZFS: BTRFS Intro & Benchmarks
,----[ Quote ]
| ZFS may be locked into the Solaris operating system but âButter FSâ is on the
| horizon and itâs boasting more features and better performance.
`----
http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7308/
Kernel 2.6.29: Corbet Says Btrfs Next Generation Filesystem
,----[ Quote ]
| Linux kernel developer Jonathan Corbet has just previewed the features of the
| upcoming Linux Kernel 2.6.29 that includes Btrfs, which he claims is the
| filesystem of the future.
`----
http://www.linux-magazine.com/online/news/kernel_2_6_29_corbet_says_btrfs_next_generation_filesystem
Btrfs Merged Into Mainline Linux Kernel
,----[ Quote ]
| Btrfs, the next-generation Linux file-system conceived by Oracle and designed
| to compete with some of the features found in Sun's ZFS file-system, has just
| been merged for the Linux 2.6.29 kernel.
`----
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njk4Mw
The Evolution Of An GNU Project
,----[ Quote ]
| First lets be honest GnoMenu is a fork of another project the "Gnome Vista
| Start Menu" by Chris Hughes. Most hard core Linux users looked at the menu
| Chris did as a cheap Vista look alike. In some ways it was but Chris also
| stated that other menu designs were possible yet no one really bothered to
| pay attention. Well almost nobody. Enter Helder Fraga who took Chris' work
| and forked it into GnoMenu.
`----
http://linuxfreedom-technoshaun.blogspot.com/2009/01/evolution-of-gnu-project.html
Appeal for BtrFS Inclusion in Kernel
,----[ Quote ]
| Chris Mason, lead developer of the copy-on-write BtrFS filesystem, has
| appealed for its inclusion in the Linux kernel.
`----
http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/online/news/appeal_for_btrfs_inclusion_in_kernel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkrtjEAACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7N2QCeKGPiScu32tyep8FsLg57HR42
FdoAnjwtv32RzzQvPHY4vrdcnat+ua5m
=tjUg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
