If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

ZFS On Linux Is Now Set For "Wide Scale Deployment"

Phoronix: ZFS On Linux Is Now Set For "Wide Scale Deployment"

The Sun/Oracle ZFS file-system port to the Linux kernel has now been deemed ready with its new release as "ready for wide scale deployment on everything from desktops to super computers." Will you use ZFS On Linux?..

Leave a comment:

For your information it is you who have to prove your claims. Furthermore, I have based my claim on a proven fact: your registering date and the date of the flame. So, rather accusing me of lying you should apologize for your lie which was proven: you have said kraftman is banned and you have based your claim - that I have registered here, because "I" was banned - on this lie. Lying and accusing others of doing so seems to be domain of kebbabert and "you".

You were the one who made the original claims, the burden of proof is on you buddy.

Leave a comment:

Oracle claims to be 20x faster than IBM in some benchmarks, not always. But that text is not allowed, because Oracle must always be 20x faster. So Oracle must withdraw the text.

This is actually funny. IBM was the company that popularized FUD, according to wikipedia. For instance, IBM claims that one Mainframe can replace 1.500 of the x86 servers. If you study the claim a bit, you will discover that all x86 servers idle. So, IBM can replace 1.500 servers if they all idle at 2-3 percent load. If the x86 servers start doing work, then the Mainframe can not handle the load, it will be too much. Sometimes IBM can virtualize 1.500 servers, but not always. But this IBM text is allowed. Why not Oracle? IBM accusing Oracle of being faster sometimes is funny, because IBM started the whole thing.

Wasn't their claim more specified rather than being 20x faster in some benchmarks? IBM probably learned on its mistakes, but it seems SUN and Oracle didn't. Pure Oracle - they doesn't even know how to spread FUD.

[No, that would be madness. You never ever use the latest version in production. It is only desktop users that can afford problems on their pcs. Large stock exchanges, for instance London running Linux + Solaris, never upgrade the distro. They always use the same OS version and never touch it. Never upgrade it.

It's madness to claim Oracle operating system is faster while they're using different components. They could just say their java version is faster, but it seems this is another example of lame FUD. And it wasn't about using the latest jave version, but matching one. Isn't you intentionally ignoring such important details?

There is lots of talk of Kraftman from you. Why? Nobody cares about Kraftman, or thinks of him. I almost forgot he existed, until you started to talk about him in every thread. Why do you mention Kraftman in every post?

Hey, I suggest you login with your old account Kraftman, instead of using lot of other accounts. Can you do that, Kraftman?

I didn't started to talk about the guy. It was probably you, but under different account like sergio, illuminati or few others like SlowLORis or something like that. I have proven Illuminati was saying untrue things and you're doing the same. It seems you're the same person. None of 'you' have even replied to my comments where I pointed important thing. Furthermore, do you really think mentioning someone else will make you look more serious? There are users who said you're just trolling.

Oracle claims to be 20x faster than IBM in some benchmarks, not always. But that text is not allowed, because Oracle must always be 20x faster. So Oracle must withdraw the text.

This is actually funny. IBM was the company that popularized FUD, according to wikipedia. For instance, IBM claims that one Mainframe can replace 1.500 of the x86 servers. If you study the claim a bit, you will discover that all x86 servers idle. So, IBM can replace 1.500 servers if they all idle at 2-3 percent load. If the x86 servers start doing work, then the Mainframe can not handle the load, it will be too much. Sometimes IBM can virtualize 1.500 servers, but not always. But this IBM text is allowed. Why not Oracle? IBM accusing Oracle of being faster sometimes is funny, because IBM started the whole thing.

Someone's quote from this unfair benchmark:To be a fair comparison don't you need to have the latest RHEL -vs- latest Solaris (including matching JRE versions) ?
But then again fair comparisons doesn't seem to be the norm at Oracle.

No, that would be madness. You never ever use the latest version in production. It is only desktop users that can afford problems on their pcs. Large stock exchanges, for instance London running Linux + Solaris, never upgrade the distro. They always use the same OS version and never touch it. Never upgrade it.

Now I see why you were attacking Kraftman who seems to be out of Phoronix for a while. It's easy to say shit about someone who's not aware about it. You're such a coward.

There is lots of talk of Kraftman from you. Why? Nobody cares about Kraftman, or thinks of him. I almost forgot he existed, until you started to talk about him in every thread. Why do you mention Kraftman in every post?

Hey, I suggest you login with your old account Kraftman, instead of using lot of other accounts. Can you do that, Kraftman?

Leave a comment:

Answering an accusation with an accusation? So what you're saying is that you have no way to prove that you're not kraftman? And then lying about what is clearly archived in forum posts?
I see that you have a lot to learn my friend.

For your information it is you who have to prove your claims. Furthermore, I have based my claim on a proven fact: your registering date and the date of the flame. So, rather accusing me of lying you should apologize for your lie which was proven: you have said kraftman is banned and you have based your claim - that I have registered here, because "I" was banned - on this lie. Lying and accusing others of doing so seems to be domain of kebbabert and "you".

Leave a comment:

I have also done such research and it seems you're lying me once again. After comparing your posts to kebbabert it seems it is you that's using at least two accounts. Like I pointed in another place you have registered much later, so you couldn't saw kraftman vs kebbabert flames. You're saying similar things and sound like kebbabert. Furthermore, you're defending a troll and tries to cheat us he's/you're not a troll. If you would really done some research you would know it was kebbabert who was always quitting after loosing a flame and then he was coming back to troll once again. I've checked this and this clearly shows kebbabert was trolling. You have written something completely opposite, so it definitely shows you're a kebbabert. Too bad for you, because you have missed such a detail.

Answering an accusation with an accusation? So what you're saying is that you have no way to prove that you're not kraftman? And then lying about what is clearly archived in forum posts?
I see that you have a lot to learn my friend.

Leave a comment:

Do you expect anyone sane will take something like this seriously? Where's the configuration of both operating systems? It's done by Oracle and they didn't provide necessary data, so it can't be taken seriously.

Leave a comment:

I don't remember you were asking me for something. Linux is for sure faster than Solaris. Otherwise, it would be Solaris running in HPC and stock exchanges. Furthermore, there are reasons it is called slowlaris by many. There's a difference between proving someone's wrong and accepting such fact by him. According to intellivision - or you, if you're him and I bet you are- you can be this Kraftman or some antiBSD or slOWlaris folks as well. You're using emotions and your writing style is very childish. Your posts are also taken out from the reality.

Leave a comment:

Oh, I missed that. I asked him many times to show any links and he never showed any. Just like you do. And you seem to remember a lot about what Kraftman supposedly said or not said. So, henceforth, I will call you Kraftman.

Can you show me any threads where Kraftman "always proved his claims"? I dont remember he did. I remember he showed one link, and he said that Linux is faster than Solaris. The link benchmarked one 800 MHz SPARC single core cpu, vs 2.4GHz dual core Linux and Linux was actually faster. But hey, even Windows would be faster on a dual core 2.4GHz cpu, vs Linux running on a 800 MHz cpu. That link was totally irrelevant, and did not prove anything. So, no, I dont remember Kraftman ever proving anyone of his weird claims.

But please, show us a thread where Kraftman proved me wrong. Because he never did.

I don't remember you were asking me for something. Linux is for sure faster than Solaris. Otherwise, it would be Solaris running in HPC and stock exchanges. Furthermore, there are reasons it is called slowlaris by many. There's a difference between proving someone's wrong and accepting such fact by him. According to intellivision - or you, if you're him and I bet you are- you can be this Kraftman or some antiBSD or slOWlaris folks as well. You're using emotions and your writing style is very childish. Your posts are also taken out from the reality.