Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> writes:
quoted text
> Well, that description of DragonFly isn't really accurate any more,
> we're about as close to FreeBSD 4 as FreeBSD 7 is... [...]
>
> I froze all the softupdates work in DragonFly prior to the snapshot
> code, and have not performed or allowed any new softupdates work to be
> ported over since then, only bug fixes.  [...]
>
> DragonFly has a new filesystem called HAMMER in the works which should
> become production ready in a few months.  [...]

OK, so you reject softupdates because it took time to mature and you
assume it stopped improving when you stopped paying attention.

How long do you think it will take for HAMMER to mature?  Realistically?
How long will HAMMER be "a huge source of bugs in the system" before it
stabilizes?

Think back to when you started DragonFly.  How soon did you expect it to
overtake FreeBSD in SMP performance?  And how long did it actually take?
Actually, it never happened - DrangonFly doesn't scale at all across
multiple cores, while FreeBSD 7 leads the pack.

Perhaps you should adjust your expectations a bit.  I don't doubt that
HAMMER will be a very interesting file system when it's stable, but I
doubt very much that will happen any time soon.  In fact, I think it
will take about as long for HAMMER to mature as it took for softupdates
and SMPng.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"