One item in their comparison is that they claim OMV is a single developer.
I have to admit that is an issue for me in terms of using it.
If it was true, why would that make a difference to you? I mean Microsoft has tons of programmers, yet they're routinely shown up by small firms, in terms of innovation. Their solution to that problem, innovation, is to buy the small firm which gets immediately folded into the larger firm and rapidly becomes mediocre. Bigger is not always better, and anything done by committee or bureaucracy will lack certainty and focus.
FreeNAS, unfortunately, is based on BSD. That limitation, in itself, should be enough to prevent anyone from using it, who is looking for extra value through server add-ons. As one example, BSD itself limits the use of virtualization techniques and app's. For Linux, and OMV, there are 110,000 Dockers available. With Linux and Dockers, there's something for everyone. BSD? BSD's equivalent to Dockers are "Jails" and that tech is nowhere near as developed as Docker.
______________________________________________
As I understand it, the core product is run by Volker Theile (who, BTW, used to develop FreeNAS back in the day). Was that mentioned? 
This is the projects roster.
An interesting blog post from 2009 about this:
http://www.freenas.org/blog/freenas-ready-for-the-next-step/
One can only guess about the drama hidden behind that blog post?
Hum, 20 contributors on GitHub repository: https://github.com/openmediava…vault/graphs/contributors
No people in GH organisation: https://github.com/orgs/openmediavault/people
the fact that FreeNAS GUI is only usable by a shared root user.
Same with OMV.
Is it true?
In reality, OMV is developed by a single user. The contributors are just submitting small patches. On the other hand, Volker made OMV extendable using plugins. There are lots of plugins developed by many people (although it is a fairly small number right now).
not yet enterprise grade
OMV isn't targeted at enterprise either. I don't think FreeNAS was either until IX took over.
BTW: check your PM's - I wrote a short blurb on installing ZFS. (It got caught in the moderators queue.) While I think you'll do fine with the plugin install, and most default settings should work fine; the more important part of the post is setting a few pool parameters at the start, to insure that the ZFS pool handles Linux permissions correctly.
________________________________________________________________________________
I was going to mention iXsystems as yet another serious detractor, from a development prospective. The development of FreeNAS is directly impacted by trying to support iXsystem's commercial products. (And note that the cost of having so many paid programmers on staff, in California, is not small.) FreeNAS development is, without doubt, hampered or at least skewed by the commercial imperative.
Free projects are about:
1. First and foremost - "function" and
2. The "happiness of the end user", all of which leads to
3. "Donations" that keep the project going.
________________________________________________________________________________
As far an continuing development goes, it appears that OMV will be supporting BTRFS, in the GUI, in the next version and, as I understand it, ZFS will be supported as well. Perhaps, by that time, BTRFS will be ready for prime time. In the interim and beyond, as you know, there's nothing wrong with ZFS.
Since you're supporting business customers, there's a ZFS attribute (snapshots) that I consider to be indispensible to businesses, for delete protection (I'm thinking of disgruntaled employees). Take a look at this guide for zfs-auto-snapshot.
Thinking about it, after using it as a feature talking point with a customer, restoring individual (crucial files) might make up a bit of additional business for you.
Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!
