Re: what is our answer to ZFS?

[Andreas Happe <andreashappe@snikt.net>]

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