Re: Futures - HAMMER comparison testing?

[Michael Neumann <mneumann@xxxxxxxx>]

Bill Hacker wrote:
> Michael Neumann wrote:
> > Bill Hacker wrote:
> > > I'm guessing it will be a while yet before HAMMER is ready for this, 
> > > but it seems to be moving fast - and cleanly - so...
> >
> > Sorry to hijack this thread. Just wanna mention a little write down of 
> > mine about HammerFS features (and sometimes comparing it with ZFS):
> >
> > http://www.ntecs.de/blog/articles/2008/01/17/zfs-vs-hammerfs
> >
> > I can't await to try it out in real!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >   Michael
>
> Michael - that's a good start!
>
> Such as good start, that I'd like to  suggest the 'un-blog-like' course 
> of correcting the original, at least 'for a while yet' rather than 
> blogging-on the errata at the tail.

Yes, I fixed it a bit ;-)

> I don't think your ZFS assessment is 100% accurate, so a bit of clean-up 
> there could reduce flame-bait.

Done.

> That may earn further alteration if/as/when Sun integrate 'lustre' 
> features. At present, HAMMMERfs and ZFS have only partial overlap in 
> their Venn diagrams.
>
> But I encourage you to keep updating and tracking the changes.
>
> Maybe it should open with a date-stamped 'current state of ...'?

You mean using a "@@0x..." (HAMMER timestamp) in the URL ;-)
I wait until I port my blogging software natively over to HAMMER ;-)

Regards,

  Michael