There’s a FreeBSD Forums thread about ZFS and Hammer, as several people have pointed out to me. It’s interesting to see, but there isn’t a lot of quantitative discussion. (It’s a forum post, not a white paper, though.)
4 Replies to “ZFS and Hammer conversation”
Comments are closed.
If HAMMER2 is portable, FreeBSD devs could add it in base, then both communities could help Dillon to finnish this job.
I’ve had a chance to read through the discussion (its actually also a reddit). Its true there isn’t much objectivity, its mainly about people defending ZFS. What I can appreciate however, is that someone has actually decided to get feedback from the community comparing these two file systems. HAMMER from what I have experienced using it, is very much underrated. I am very much looking forward to HAMMER 2.
Bruno,
Matt already told about the challenges that FreeBSD devs will face to port Hammer. You can find more information here:
https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortingHAMMERFS
I think hammer2 have the same challenges to be ported to FBSD.
I understand that HAMMER2 has been designed to be more portable (less tied to dragonfly) than HAMMER1 with the express goal of being portable to other systems. Assuming that’s correct, Hammer2 will not represent the same challenges as Hammer 1.