On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:44:00PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2011 10:11 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:07:55PM +0800, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
> >> On 4/14/11, John R Pierce<email@example.com> wrote:
> >>> since this is the centos list, I really didn't want to suggest this, but
> >>> if I was building a 20 or 40TB or whatever storage server, I do believe
> >>> I'd be strongly consider using Solaris, or one of its variants like
> >>> OpenIndiana, with ZFS.
> >>> ZFS was engineered from the ground up to scale to zetabytes
> >> I was actually considering this but then came news that Oracle was
> >> killing OpenSolaris and likely to be pushing OCFS so decided I
> >> probably don't want to have something come bite me a year or two down
> >> the road. I'm not sure how things developed since then though.
> >> But based on your recommendation and Christopher Chan's, it would seem
> >> like you guys don't think that long term support/updates would be an
> >> issue for ZFS?
> > ZFS and OCFS play in different spaces. And ZFS is going nowhere... if
> > you want to use on an "open" OS, OpenIndiana may be a good bet, but
> > you're best short-term / "mature" option would be Nexenta or Solaris
> > Express.
> Huh? What gives Nexenta a better advantage over OpenIndiana? They are
> both in the same boat. Both will have to migrate to illumos and move
> away from the last OpenSolaris ON release. Oh, Nexenta has a company
> backing it? Makes no different when both projects will be using the same
> core image. Now, if OpenIndiana resists using illumos, then you will
> have a case for Nexenta over OpenIndiana.
OpenIndiana is in their what, first release? I don't think that
Nexenta 3.x is based on it *yet*.
Both will eventually converge.
In the meantime, yes, for storage needs I'd go with Nexenta for the
reasons you mentioned.
For personal use? Maybe different factors.
Nexenta the company of course will be contributing to OpenIndiana and
CentOS mailing list