Docker is great. For those that don't know, it's basically a sandboxing infrastructure for linux running many apps on one physical or virtual server. The future is only having one app per server container. This means mounting a read-only opaque deployment image with an overlay so has a live-cd inspired filesystem (AUFS or dmsetup overlay). Install just one app per a container, do that, and do it well. Combined with an approach of just enough operating system (JEOS), it's possible to have lean-and-mean server instances minus all the default crapware (i.e., bluetooth and pptp).
The only feedback is that BTRFS == fsck, and is also sponsored by Oracle, an organization that is killing off the superior, but N.I.H., ZFS. Let's not forget all of their other community fails (Berkeley DB, Java, MySQL, OpenOffice).
>
The only feedback is that BTRFS == fsck, and is also sponsored by Oracle, an organization that is killing off the superior, but N.I.H., ZFS. Let's not forget all of their other community fails (Berkeley DB, Java, MySQL, OpenOffice).
Personally I always read the situation as Linux not supporting ZFS because it was born under the Solaris banner, while Btrfs, though being developed "in cooperation with" third parties, is fundamentally a shiny open generic FOSS technology (the name itself eschews branding to make it sound like "look, it's all just B-trees, you can understand this.") Heck, until this conversation, I thought Btrfs was something Linus himself had a stake in, like Git. What wonders a different brand-image can do to people who have incomplete information :)
The ZFS sources are licensed in a way that makes it impossible to merge them into the Linux kernel. You could run ZFS as a user space daemon communicating with the kernel over the FUSE interface but it's never going to be part of the kernel itself.
My personal vain hope is that tux3 will become an awesome filesystem and will become the successor to ext4. tux3 promises to support snapshotting.
So far tux3 looks very promising when it comes to the underlying design and the performance. But we shall see about features and stability when it gets closer to completion. And also if any of the added features will hurt performance.
Having worked directly with Daniel Phillips, it's lead creator... I am overly skeptical. His track record at finishing complex projects is not so great. Look at Zumastor for an idea
The only feedback is that BTRFS == fsck, and is also sponsored by Oracle, an organization that is killing off the superior, but N.I.H., ZFS. Let's not forget all of their other community fails (Berkeley DB, Java, MySQL, OpenOffice).
FreeBSD ZFS and ZFSonLinux are good-to-go.