DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2008-07
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design

From:	Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Sat, 26 Jul 2008 17:50:21 -0700 (PDT)

:
:Why LVM why not follow the ZFS path ?

    I think its a mistake to integrate the storage layer into the
    filesystem.  That would effectively limit us to a single filesystem,
    ZFS.

					-Matt

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@FreeBSD.org>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net>

References:
- [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <giffunip@tutopia.com>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com>
- Re: [Tux3] Comparison to Hammer fs design
  - From: Maslan <maslanbsd@gmail.com>

[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index]