@jwildeboer Drat, it looks like it's up to companies like Canonical to support and update the ZFS code.

@Ertain Not really. It's up to Oracle to put ZFS either under GPLv2 or a compatible license IMHO if they want to see it supported on Linux. That won't happen AFAICS. Shrug.

@jwildeboer but what can I use as an alternative? I'm not sure about that ... BTRFS? Hm. I have read about sooo many corrupted systems ... :(

Hm.

@thomas what is your usecase? What features of ZFS are mission critical for you that you cannot get with other file systems and technologies like lvm2, ext4, xfs etc?

@jwildeboer My main use case is LXD ;-) I'd like to have snapshots, CoW and incremental file system sync across systems, in case I need to migrate containers.

@thomas that’s not a usecase, that’s a technology decision ;) And according to [1] you can get that with CEPH and LVM too. Which are both upstream even outside of UbuntuLand.

[1] lxd.readthedocs.io/en/latest/s

@jwildeboer yes, partly :) Unfortunately CEPH does not support Quotas with LXD (and I guess it's mor complex to set up ?) and LVM does not have incremental FS copies, which I like so much about ZFS

@thomas well, there’s always OpenShift ;) But seriously. ZFS might be good for you when you accept that ZoL is already a fork of ZFS and you only have one vendor to rely upon. Your freedom, your decision. Alternatives are out there, but they might be more than just swapping a file system.

Virtual manager can make snapshots so I assume incrementals can me done too. One way to do the syncing is to use drbd but on very busy systems there are some set backs.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.wildeboer.net

Mastodon instance for people with Wildeboer as their last name