Talk:Write Anywhere File Layout

message: I came here looking for information to compare and contrast WAFL with other file systems. Some googling gave me this:
:ZFS vs. NetAPPs WAFL - Comparison chart comments/chart.
:ZFS vs. NetAPPs WAFL Chart - Chart made for above article.
It looks like the work in the NetAPP whitepaper partially inspired ZFS. Is there anyone who can speak to tradeoffs when it comes to WAFL?
::See my user page and email me if you like. The tradeoffs will depend on your application, and whether you'll be using a NetApp filer or not. Zuiram 04:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Disclaimer; I'm a NetApp employee. There are some inaccuracies (well, quite a few actually) on this page. I'd normally just get editing, but I'm aware of Wikipedia:Npov and Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. But I can add a lot from the Wikipedia:Verifiability perspective. So I will make a start on this, but please get back to me (either here or on my talk page) if you feel any of the edits have veered into the unacceptable. Alex (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critiques / Comparisons of WAFL 

message: Network Appliance name has changed to NetApp. I have updated the article with the new name.
--Sandeep346 (talk) 16:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Company Name 

message: NetApp sued SUN over zfs.  This lawsuit should probably be reflected here somehow
because I think it may affect the validity of the quoted NetApp patent.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.179.48.132 (talk) 06:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent Lawsuit 

message: The NetApp technical report titled "A Storage Networking Appliance", TR-3001, contains the statement "WAFL,the storage appliance's file system, ..." which contradicts the wiki statement "WAFL is not a file system." Also note that one of the references refers to WAFL as a file system as well.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.69.117.57 (talk) 00:12, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's more complicated than "WAFL is not a file system"; WAFL is similar to, well, ZFS (although, as WAFL came first, it might be better stated as "ZFS is similar to WAFL"), in that it has a layer that implements RAID, a layer that implements byte-array containers (that's the DMU in ZFS), and layers that implement various semantics atop those containers (ZPL in ZFS, the code that implements directories, named streams, "virtual volumes" (I think that's what got named FlexVol(R)), SCSI LUNs for Fibre Channel and iSCSI, etc.).  (And, yes, much of that code is in WAFL, Kostadis's claims in What Is WAFL part III nonwithstanding.) Guy Harris (talk) 19:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is WAFL a file system? 

message: *ONTAP 8 increases maximum aggregate size.
*Dedupe is online scan, not offline.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.240.30.23 (talk) 11:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some corrections 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Write Anywhere File Layout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070124223420/http://www.suse.de:80/%7Eagruen/acl/linux-acls/online/ to http://www.suse.de/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified