# OpenSolaris is dead



## Matty (Aug 12, 2010)

*Future of ZFS*

Hi,

Looks like after solaris 11 there will be no more opensolaris (http://www.osnews.com/story/23674/Oracle_Details_Solaris_11_OpenSolaris_Future_Shaky). does anyone have an idea what that will mean for the future development of importing zfs into freebsd? 
Till version 23 there shouldn't be much problems but after that?

What about bug fixes and other new features (BP, encryption) and what are the plans for that point in time when the last available opensolaris zfs version is imported?

Start our own zfs-freebsd fork or look at luminos?


----------



## mix_room (Aug 12, 2010)

http://netmgt.blogspot.com/2010/08/solaris-11-2011-confirmed.html

Solaris 11 will be released. What will happen after that is unclear. It should by now be quite clear that Oracle did not buy Sun to close it down. There has been several releases of new material: including x86 servers, roadmaps for the development of SPARC and similar. 

It would seem that the story of the demise of OSOL are exagerated. 

According to http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/3897706/Oracle-Details-Upcoming-Solaris-11-Release.htm Oracle will continue to invest in OSOL.

If you would read all the other discussions on integrating the newer versions of ZFS into FreeBSD then you would see that problems revolve around the work required to make inclusion possible. Python inclusion in base springs to mind.


----------



## Matty (Aug 12, 2010)

how would that even work if zfs v24+ isn't available as sourcecode?


----------



## danger@ (Aug 12, 2010)

don't forget about IllumnOS, they might maintain their own fork of ZFS which we might be able to import...


----------



## vermaden (Aug 12, 2010)

Matty said:
			
		

> how would that even work if zfs v24+ isn't available as sourcecode?



Interesting, since they already ported some of v26 ZFS code ...
http://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2010-04-2010-06.html#ZFS


----------



## Matty (Aug 12, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> Interesting, since they already ported some of v26 ZFS code ...
> http://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2010-04-2010-06.html#ZFS



ok apparently the last zpool version is already 24 and not 23, my mistake, but there is no 26 and dedup was in 20.

http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+zfs/

```
Nevada, build 128

The PSARC case for the version 20 change is:

    PSARC/2009/571 ZFS Deduplication Properties
```


----------



## oliverh (Aug 12, 2010)

I hope so ... ZFS is just great, but Oracle has a baby of its own: btrfs. 

> don't forget about IllumnOS, they might maintain their own fork of ZFS which we might be able to import... 

I doubt it, for such work you need people, who actually "breath" filesystems. Maybe some people like Kirk McKusick or Pawel Jakub Dawidek. Nobody wants some Linux-like handicraft work.


----------



## gkontos (Aug 12, 2010)

oliverh said:
			
		

> I hope so ... ZFS is just great, but Oracle has a baby of its own: btrfs.


That is totally true. Oracle will definitely try to promote its baby. 
The only hope for ZFS is if it becomes a project of its own, supported by open source communities and maybe ported to other Unix like OSs.
Given the benefits of ZFS, especially for storage purposes, it is not hard to imagine for a commercial company to adopt ZFS.

George


----------



## vermaden (Aug 12, 2010)

@Matty

Even ZFS v28 is available as source code:
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/cmd/zpool/zpool_main.c

```
4031 		(void) printf(gettext(" 21  Deduplication\n"));
   4032 		(void) printf(gettext(" 22  Received properties\n"));
   4033 		(void) printf(gettext(" 23  Slim ZIL\n"));
   4034 		(void) printf(gettext(" 24  System attributes\n"));
   4035 		(void) printf(gettext(" 25  Improved scrub stats\n"));
   4036 		(void) printf(gettext(" 26  Improved snapshot deletion "
   4037 		    "performance\n"));
   4038 		(void) printf(gettext(" 27  Improved snapshot creation "
   4039 		    "performance\n"));
   4040 		(void) printf(gettext(" 28  Multiple vdev replacements\n"));
```

You can 'grab' the whole source like that:
`# hg clone [url=ssh://anon@hg.opensolaris.org/hg/onnv/onnv-gate]ssh://anon@hg.opensolaris.org/hg/onnv/onnv-gate[/url] onnv`


----------



## Matty (Aug 12, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> @Matty
> 
> Even ZFS v28 is available as source code:
> http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/cmd/zpool/zpool_main.c
> ...



nice...


----------



## mix_room (Aug 12, 2010)

oliverh said:
			
		

> I hope so ... ZFS is just great, but Oracle has a baby of its own: btrfs.



Remember that ZFS is mature while btrfs is not yet. ZFS is fully owned by Oracle, and is not licensed under GPL. I could think of several reasons why Oracle would choose to run with ZFS, which is now also their, albeit adopted, baby. 

Remember that Oracle paid alot of money for Sun. Does it not seem slightly unreasonable that they would stop all development of the purchased platforms?


----------



## vermaden (Aug 13, 2010)

oliverh said:
			
		

> I hope so ... ZFS is just great, but Oracle has a baby of its own: btrfs.



But btrds is only a filesystem, nothing more, You still need 'another layer' to do the RAID levels and manage volumes and disks, ZFS has that built in, btrfs will never match ZFS.

Now that Oracle owns ZFS, it could release it also on GPL and allow its way to Linux kernel, that would make btrfs obsolete and useless.

IMHO Oracle would be jest plain stupid if they would try to kill best filesystem/volume manager on earth.


----------



## Matty (Aug 13, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> But btrds is only a filesystem, nothing more, You still need 'another layer' to do the RAID levels and manage volumes and disks, ZFS has that built in, btrfs will never match ZFS.
> 
> Now that Oracle owns ZFS, it could release it also on GPL and allow its way to Linux kernel, that would make btrfs obsolete and useless.
> 
> IMHO Oracle would be jest plain stupid if they would try to kill best filesystem/volume manager on earth.



how I see it is that ZFS will stay in solaris and will no longer be available as opensource.
Btrfs will became the FS for Oracles own linux and will stay gpl. If people want ZFS and all it's goodies than customers would have to upgrade to solaris and pay for it.

either way if freebsd is cut off from the zfs source after v24 or what ever what we do then? And that was may initial question: If the ZFS scenario is unfolding what are our options. Import to the last available version and take it from there with/out the collaboration with the illuminos folks. 


second and less likely option is that all stays the same and dtrace and zfs will stay under the current license and all is good. After all in the article oracle said to keep committing to the open source community; what ever that mean (product wise).

isn't that the big plan of oracle?
from enrty level to mission critical? linux/mysql to solaris/oracle. All from the same vendor software and hardware wise with support.


----------



## tingo (Aug 13, 2010)

Matty said:
			
		

> either way if freebsd is cut off from the zfs source after v24 or what ever what we do then? And that was may initial question: If the ZFS scenario is unfolding what are our options. Import to the last available version and take it from there with/out the collaboration with the illuminos folks.


What we do? We keep it (zfs) of course!
And we improve on it as we see fit (and have people available with interest in such things).
Eventually it might be replaced by something else, but when that happens we take it from there.




> isn't that the big plan of oracle?
> from enrty level to mission critical? linux/mysql to solaris/oracle. All from the same vendor software and hardware wise with support.



The big plan of Oracle is to make money. Full stop. No surprises there. They might be good supporters of open source, or they might not. The jury is still out on that question. We will live and see.


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

mix_room said:
			
		

> Remember that ZFS is mature while btrfs is not yet. ZFS is fully owned by Oracle, and is not licensed under GPL. I could think of several reasons why Oracle would choose to run with ZFS, which is now also their, albeit adopted, baby.
> 
> Remember that Oracle paid alot of money for Sun. Does it not seem slightly unreasonable that they would stop all development of the purchased platforms?



Java is big business, the cashcow, not ZFS. Remember? ZFS is _more_ mature than btrfs -- really _mature_ is something like UFS. But btrfs gains lots more hype, like ext4, like Linux per se. Since when is quality the common denominator in todays business? Why doesn't *BSD rules the market? Why is Windows the king of the desktop, followed by Mac OS?


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> But btrds is only a filesystem, nothing more, You still need 'another layer' to do the RAID levels and manage volumes and disks, ZFS has that built in, btrfs will never match ZFS.
> 
> Now that Oracle owns ZFS, it could release it also on GPL and allow its way to Linux kernel, that would make btrfs obsolete and useless.
> 
> IMHO Oracle would be jest plain stupid if they would try to kill best filesystem/volume manager on earth.



You don't need to sell it to me, I already "bought" it ;-) But think different, why to hell dominates Linux the market? Because of quality? I do think you have the answer already ;-)


----------



## vermaden (Aug 13, 2010)

@oliverh

Yes, its fscked up world unfortunately ...


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

Btw. OpenSolaris is dead:

http://sstallion.blogspot.com/2010/08/opensolaris-is-dead.html


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

http://sstallion.blogspot.com/2010/08/opensolaris-is-dead.html

What do you think about it? What about the future of ZFS?


----------



## graudeejs (Aug 13, 2010)

http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=16867


----------



## Matty (Aug 13, 2010)

oliverh said:
			
		

> Btw. OpenSolaris is dead:
> 
> http://sstallion.blogspot.com/2010/08/opensolaris-is-dead.html



but on the other side:


```
We will continue to use the CDDL license statement in nearly all
Solaris source code files. We will not remove the CDDL from any files
in Solaris to which it already applies, and new source code files that
are created will follow the current policy regarding applying the CDDL
(simply, that usr/src files will have the CDDL, and the very small
minority of files in usr/closed might not have it). Use of other open
licenses in non-ON consolidations (e.g. GPL in the Desktop area) will
also continue. As before, requests to change the license associated
with source code are case-by-case decisions.

We will distribute updates to approved CDDL or other open source-
licensed code following full releases of our enterprise Solaris
operating system. In this manner, new technology innovations will
show up in our releases before anywhere else. We will no longer
distribute source code for the entirety of the Solaris operating
system in real-time while it is developed, on a nightly basis.

Anyone who is consuming Solaris code using the CDDL, whether in pieces
or as a part of the OpenSolaris source distribution or a derivative
thereof, would therefore be able to consume any updates we release at
that time, under the terms of the CDDL, LGPL, or whatever license
applies.
```


----------



## gkontos (Aug 13, 2010)

R.I.P OpenSolaris


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

@matty well I read this, but the path for the future is clear. Oracle is a company of the 80s ...


----------



## Matty (Aug 13, 2010)

oliverh said:
			
		

> @matty well I read this, but the path for the future is clear. Oracle is a company of the 80s ...


what you mean by that?


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

As you can see, it isn't about ZFS only. It's about OpenSolaris per se, ZFS, VirtualBox, Java, OpenOffice and it's not a FreeBSD specific topic, therefore offtopic.


----------



## graudeejs (Aug 13, 2010)

sorry I was referring to your question
>> What about the future of ZFS?

I should have quoted it


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

Well, driven by IP, less to none transparency, no openness in any form at all.


----------



## oliverh (Aug 13, 2010)

Yes I know, I'm actually posting in this topic too ;-)


----------



## Jago (Aug 13, 2010)

oliverh said:
			
		

> @matty well I read this, but the path for the future is clear. Oracle is a company of the 80s ...


Yes, contrary to SUN, Oracle actually likes to make money. Which is why SUN had to be sold in the first place.


----------



## noz (Aug 14, 2010)

I was a big fan of OpenSolaris because of ZFS.  A lot of the people over on their forums kept reassuring people that everything's going to be fine and everyone should just be patient.  That went on for months, but it was pretty clear to me that the sun was setting.  It's sad that we're losing a distribution that could have had such a bright future.

As for ZFS, I think it's still licensed under CDDL.  Continued development of ZFS for FreeBSD should be okay.


----------



## oliverh (Aug 14, 2010)

Yes, but Oracle will not release new code at once, but after a certain amount of time or maybe no code at all if the choose so.


----------



## oliverh (Aug 14, 2010)

Jago said:
			
		

> Yes, contrary to SUN, Oracle actually likes to make money. Which is why SUN had to be sold in the first place.



In which time do you live? You can make money with openness too. Bullying with IP for example isn't necessary at all. It's 2010 now, not 1985. Btw. have a lock at their stocks and compare it e.g. with IBM. Oracle is on its way down ...


----------



## DutchDaemon (Aug 14, 2010)

[ OpenSolaris & ZFS threads have been merged, as they're basically about the same thing ]


----------



## oliverh (Aug 14, 2010)

Yes thanks and sorry, answering the same questions in different threads is prone to fail ;-)

IllumOS goes strong: http://gdamore.blogspot.com/2010/08/hand-may-be-forced.html


----------



## Crabb (Aug 15, 2010)

http://www.osnews.com/story/23683/Oracle_Kills_OpenSolaris_Moves_Development_Behind_Closed_Doors


----------



## d_mon (Aug 17, 2010)

*Opera for Solaris has been discontinued...*

http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2010/04/29/the-setting-sun

The setting Sun

In order to ensure a consistently high quality browser across our most popular desktop platforms we have reluctantly decided to drop support for Solaris. This will allow our UNIX development team to focus all of their attention on bringing Opera for Linux and FreeBSD up to final release quality, meaning that a 10.5x release for these platforms will happen as soon as feasibly possible.

Please be assured that we have no plans to drop support for either Linux or FreeBSD. These are the preferred UNIX-like environments of our development team and hence fully supporting a browser on these Operating Systems is more straightforward.

As always, the Desktop team will continue to consider adding support for further environments and/or processor architectures in the future...


----------



## vermaden (Sep 2, 2010)

*Pawel Jakub Dawidek* just ported *ZFS v28* to FreeBSD, new code is ready for testing (and bug hunting):
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-August/019541.html


----------



## aragon (Sep 2, 2010)

OMGz awesome!


----------



## olav (Sep 3, 2010)

Woha, already 28! That means its hopefully considered stable/production ready within 12 months?


----------



## gilinko (Sep 4, 2010)

olav said:
			
		

> Woha, already 28! That means its hopefully considered stable/production ready within 12 months?



Nope. It will only be included in the release of FreeBSD 9.0(not scheduled yet, I think). There is a point of no return at version 16 if I remember it correctly.


----------



## UNIXgod (Sep 4, 2010)

gilinko said:
			
		

> Nope. It will only be included in the release of FreeBSD 9.0(not scheduled yet, I think). There is a point of no return at version 16 if I remember it correctly.



point of no return?


----------



## phoenix (Sep 4, 2010)

Huh?

Upgrading a pool to version X means that version X-anything cannot access it.  But, this is the first I've heard of a "point of no return".

Version 19 is when all the pieces fall into place for an (almost) bullet-proof pool:  l2arc removal, slog removal, txg roll-back (or is that 20?), etc.

But there's no "point of no return".


----------



## gilinko (Sep 4, 2010)

phoenix said:
			
		

> Huh?
> 
> Upgrading a pool to version X means that version X-anything cannot access it.  But, this is the first I've heard of a "point of no return".
> 
> ...



The "the point of no return" is when upgrading your pool from say 13 to 14, and if something doesn't work quite right you can "downgrade" the pool to 13 again(this is on OSOL/Solaris at least). If I remember it correctly when you move to version 16 something is permanently changed in the pools metadata which makes it impossible reverse your pool upgrade and you can't downgrade your OS to an earlier version that doesn't support ZFS above your current pool version(as you point out). 

So there is no problem upgrading, but if you suddenly need to downgrade then you might run in trouble.


----------



## Anonymous (Sep 12, 2010)

mix_room said:
			
		

> http://netmgt.blogspot.com/2010/08/solaris-11-2011-confirmed.htmlPython inclusion in base springs to mind.


 Isn't it already?


----------



## phoenix (Sep 12, 2010)

No, Python is not part of a base install of FreeBSD.


----------



## Matty (Sep 13, 2010)

btw for the ones who missed it:

http://openin.org/ 

```
OpenIndiana is part of the Illumos Foundation, and provides a true open source community 
alternative to Solaris 11 and Solaris 11 Express, with an open development model and full community participation.
```

ZFS v27:
http://twitpic.com/2nk490
http://twitpic.com/2nk51w

uname:
http://twitpic.com/2nrks1


----------



## rusty (Sep 14, 2010)

Good intro to OpenIndiana
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/14/openindiana_launch/
http://wiki.openindiana.org:8080/display/oi/OpenIndiana+Wiki+Home


----------



## Daisuke_Aramaki (Sep 24, 2010)

vermaden said:
			
		

> *Pawel Jakub Dawidek* just ported *ZFS v28* to FreeBSD, new code is ready for testing (and bug hunting):
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-August/019541.html



Awesome! Something to do this weekend.

@Matty

Didn't know about this. Will check it out. Thanks. By the way, Monaco 10pt aliased is an ace font.


----------



## hansivers (Oct 3, 2010)

Well, another week, another senior Sun engineer leaving Oracle.. 

http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/and_now_page_2



> Jeff Bonwick was a Senior Software Architect at Sun/Oracle until his departure from the company on 30 September 2010. *He led the team which developed ZFS for Solaris*.


----------



## UNIXgod (Oct 3, 2010)

hansivers said:
			
		

> Well, another week, another senior Sun engineer leaving Oracle..
> 
> http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/and_now_page_2



Dropping like flies. Maybe they should get together and start a new sun =)


----------

