Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

226 comments

A new open file system? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908219)

What does Reiser have to say about this? har har har

Re:A new open file system? (4, Funny)

PalmKiller (174161) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908251)

Who?

Re:A new open file system? (0, Redundant)

east coast (590680) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908351)

Hans Reiser [wikipedia.org] is the developer of an open source file system but is currently jailed for murder.

Re:A new open file system? (2, Funny)

Urger (817972) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908465)

Woosh

Re:A new open file system? (2, Funny)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908561)

Your sarcasm detector needs adjustment.

Re:A new open file system? (4, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908753)

Around here it's hard to tell who's serious and who's not anymore. It's amazing some of the things that get asked around here seriously. Just look up the Ask Slashdot section and you'll see tons of it.

Ask Slashdot (4, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908907)

I am totally serious: why does the back of my left ear smell like cheese doodles? I don't store any kind of foodstuffs behind my ear, and I bathe regularly. Please help.

Re:Ask Slashdot (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908967)

The gnomes sneak into your bedroom while you sleep and rub the back of your ear with orange cheese powder, then sneak off. The best thing to do is not sleep until you see them.

Re:Ask Slashdot (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909019)

Put in an Ask Slashdot. I'm sure you'll get tons of helpful advice.

Re:Ask Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909295)

Whoosh

Re:Ask Slashdot (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909915)

Whoosh!

Re:A new open file system? (2, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909039)

When somebody asks a question that could be answered by a very simple Google, they're either being funny or they're so terminally lazy it's silly to respond too them. And when the question is about a guy whose murder trial has been in the news (especially the nerdcentric news) for months, I think it's safe to assume that the questioner is not being lazy.

Sheesh... (3, Insightful)

adolf (21054) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908229)

Allow me to be the first to say: It's about fucking time.

Re:Sheesh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908277)

+1

With the release of advfs, it makes the lack of zfs for linux a bit less painful.

Re:Sheesh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908903)

In your face ZFS losers!!! The penguin is unstoppable. We have the best coders who can do stuff like this. M$ and $UN are more dead then B$D!!! lol

Re:Sheesh... (3, Funny)

snoyberg (787126) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909251)

M$ and $UN are more dead then B$D!!! lol

Yes, but does netcraft confirm it?

Re:Sheesh... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23910135)

Hey those $s in MS and SUN are telling me that you're making parallels between Sun and Microsoft.

Did Sun buy ZFS from the guys that made QDOS?

What's the point? (4, Interesting)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908299)

Is there some reason to pick this file system over any of the other 100 file systems you can get for Linux?

Re:What's the point? (5, Funny)

cephah (1244770) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908349)

This one is -- advanced, so it must be good, right? Right?

I'll add this on my list of JusticeLeagueHardware! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909487)

GameBoy Advance: ./
Advance Speaker System: ./
Advance Laxative: ./
Advance Filesystem: ./
Advance Car Insurance: O_o

Re:What's the point? (5, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908353)

because it's not a "killer" filesystem?

Re:What's the point? (4, Funny)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908355)

i dunno... no wifi, less space than ZFS. lame!

Re:What's the point? (5, Informative)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908401)

AdvFS is comparable in features to ZFS - it has snapshotting, intelligent striping and mirroring, dynamic resizing, etc.

In short, there's no comparable production filesystem in Linux right now. There's Btrfs from Oracle, but it's in deep alpha.

Re:What's the point? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908601)

Nah dude, SGI's xfs (in vanilla Linux since ages now) can do all of those tricks, too.

Re:What's the point? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908783)

except that xfs is a local filesystem, genius...

Re:What's the point? (4, Funny)

joib (70841) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908997)

So is ZFS, genius...

Re:What's the point? (4, Informative)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908795)

No, it can't. XFS has not the concept of "storage pool" that ZFS and AdvFS have. It doesn't have ZFS/AdvFS-style snapshots. XFS is also a journaling filesystem, unlike ZFS (AdvFS however is a journaled filesystem - and even then, the journaling modes of advfs allow to configure a much better data integrity than ZFS)

Re:What's the point? (5, Informative)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909037)

No. XFS is a multimedia-oriented filesystem, it was designed to support multithreaded streaming with guaranteed access times. It works well for these use-cases.

But it doesn't work well for a lot of other use-cases, though. Hence, the current development of Btrfs.

Re:What's the point? (4, Informative)

Paul Jakma (2677) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908835)

It doesn't have the Merkle tree and the associated error-detection properties of ZFS though.

Also, AdvFS (or PolyFS, as I could swear it was called in the beginning - though Google can't seem to any record of it) had a pretty bad reliability record in its earlier days, at least bad enough that its unreliability still was mentioned in DEC Open Systems Support when I visited there in 2000.. (by which stage Tru64 clearly was on life-support). ;)

Re:What's the point? (3, Interesting)

mhall119 (1035984) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908951)

Hopefully this will make Sun re-consider licensing ZFS under the GPLv2.

Re:What's the point? (2)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909141)

Hopefully this will make Sun re-consider licensing ZFS under the GPLv2.

Doubtful. GPLv3 is too nice a license for them to reject just because Linus is being bullheaded.

Re:What's the point? (1)

Cal Paterson (881180) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909957)

Linus was bullheaded about the licence originally, but he isn't being bullheaded now. He can't change the kernel to be GPLv3 compatible after the fact.

Re:What's the point? (0, Troll)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909813)

Why would they want to? Under the CDDL, *BSD, Apple, Microsoft, (pretty much everybody except linux and HURD) can use the ZFS code without being virally infected. Sun gets back any improvements and bug fixes.

Under the GPL, Sun can't enjoy any bug fixes or improvements made to the code.

Re:What's the point? (5, Interesting)

Znork (31774) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909205)

it has snapshotting, intelligent striping and mirroring, dynamic resizing

Eh, exactly which feature is unique? Snapshotting, striping, mirroring, resizing, encryption, etc, all of it can be done through the device mapper stack.

I have situations where I don't want any filesystem at all on the mixed chunks (shared iSCSI block devices, for example), others where I want partial mirrors, parts crypted, parts remote-synced, etc. Mixing block device, volume management and filesystem together in my opinion, simply bad engineering. There are far too many assumptions about what people usually do so you end up with something suitable only for exactly what the designer had in mind, and worse, sometimes completely unsuitable for what people actually do.

Having run both AdvFS and ZFS, I _vastly_ prefer the layered approach of ext3/LVM/md/etc.

there's no comparable production filesystem

Yes, well, try actually running ZFS in production for a while with any kind of odd load (and some not so odd loads at all). Sometimes things just aren't all they're hyped up to be.

Filesystems are one part of most systems where 'exciting' isn't the most desirable feature.

Re:What's the point? (3, Interesting)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909499)

ZFS is an excellent filesystem but with some serious bugs that are poorly documented. I will admit I have not played with it in a while, but when I did, there were a considerable number of growing pains and kernel tunables that needed to be tweaked to get it to play nicely. The read block size is 128K by default, the ARC buffer size is ridiculously designed to assume that you want to cache data, filesystem syncs run to check integrity even if you have disk integrity checks on the SAN, etc.

Re:What's the point? (1)

profplump (309017) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909621)

Hear hear! I think snapshots, mirrors, stripes, encryption, compression and resizing are all very useful things. But I'd like my file system to stick to managing files and use the volume and block layers to provide those features under any file system.

Re:What's the point? (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23910023)

Hear hear! I think snapshots, mirrors, stripes, encryption, compression and resizing are all very useful things.
Thank you! Finally someone wrote "Hear hear!" instead of "Here here!".

Re:What's the point? (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#23910027)

Having run both AdvFS and ZFS, I _vastly_ prefer the layered approach of ext3/LVM/md/etc.

As a unix user, I generally prefer a layered approach. How did something like ZFS manage to come from unix people for unix, rather than from our friends in Redmond?

Re:What's the point? (5, Informative)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908583)

Comparison Of File Systems [wikipedia.org]

Although its missing from some of the charts...

AdvFS [wikipedia.org]

And that page is rather limited in information.

Re:What's the point? (2, Interesting)

raddan (519638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908843)

If you don't need to know the difference, then no. But there are plenty of people who have specific requirements, and I'm glad that Linux supports them. E.g., we pay to have our Linux machines use CVFS (StorNext) and associated daemons, because we require its features. A GPL'ed CVFS suite would be awesome, but I can understand why Quantum wouldn't want to do it.

Re:What's the point? (4, Informative)

Nutria (679911) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909257)

Is there some reason to pick this file system over any of the other 100 file systems you can get for Linux?

AdvFS is a clustered FS.

Cool (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908327)

The last file system I messed around with was absolute murder.

Re:Cool (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909905)

Hans? Is that you?

STOP LAUGHING YOU HEARTLESS BASTARDS! (4, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 6 years ago | (#23910061)

That's not funny! It's wrong! It's wrong to laugh at other people's misery! Stop laughing!

I mean, look at this:
"The last file system I messed around with was absolute murder."

That is clearly meant to poke fun at how EXT3 is gradually replacing EXT2. A lot of people worked very hard on EXT2, it's served the Linux community well for a long time, so I don't think it's right to make fun of it like this!!!

Future gains (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908363)

I appreciate what they're doing, and I sincerely hope that it becomes a viable option within the next 6 months or so.

Cause I'm not using it for anything mission critical before that, anyway.

AdvFS (4, Informative)

MrMunkey (1039894) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908367)

I didn't know any of the details of what AdvFS was, so here is what Wikipedia has: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdvFS [wikipedia.org]

Re:AdvFS (2, Insightful)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908491)

Thanks. Still I have one question: does it do background filechecks (against a built-in checksum) like ZFS does?

Re:AdvFS (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908683)

That sounds like something the userspace would do, not really part of the filesystem.

Re:AdvFS (2, Interesting)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908799)

The thing I like of ZFS is that it moves basically all file-related stuff to the actual filesystem, which makes sense to me, since that's why I have a filesystem. You basically don't need to know all these annoying details, or make checksum-databases yourself and check regularly. Still, the question stands.

I think I will wait... (5, Funny)

TimothyDavis (1124707) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908379)

...I hear WinFS will be in Win7...it should be legendary.

Re:I think I will wait... (1, Insightful)

Anita Coney (648748) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908489)

How come I never have any mod points when someone says something brilliantly funny?!

Re:I think I will wait... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908637)

I can't wait when Microsoft also bundles Windows 7 with Duke Nukem Forever, Chinese Democracy, and a Phantom console.

Re:I think I will wait... (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909523)

Nah, it got nerfed on the PTR. Now it is merely Epic, but it does not appear in game

Ob HIMYM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909661)

Don't you mean:

It'll be legen-- wait for it... ...

Re:I think I will wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23910165)

Isn't that already in Vista?
no? I though it would.
or in service pack 1?
no?
Weird..

Probably won't be in W7 either.

How many filesystems (1)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908387)

Will linux need to make it "more enterprise ready"?

I think we see this claim to fame almost weekly yet it seems less and less reliance on OS filesystems and more reliance on SAN/Hardware/NAS/NFS storage.

OS filesystem improvements are welcome sight but the headline seems sensational as if all the other filesystems are actually holding adoption back. (which seems absurd)

Re:How many filesystems (2, Insightful)

afidel (530433) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909799)

What do you think actually powers many of those SAN/Hardware/NAS/NFS file servers, Linux of course. I really don't think the lack of file systems is holding Linux back, but having more of them that fit into more niches is sure to mean more adoption because Linux will be the hammer that fits the nail for those users.

Spiritual ancestor of ZFS (4, Insightful)

mihalis (28146) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908403)

I just had a quick glance through the wikipedia page on this filesystem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdvFS [wikipedia.org]
and it seems to share a surprising number of features with ZFS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS [wikipedia.org]
For example, pools, snapshots etc.

Cool, license squabbling aside I look forward to the massively fragmented UNIX codebase slowly coalescing in this area.

paging Mark Crispin (1)

ebunga (95613) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908425)

I'd love to hear Mark Crispin's comments on this.

As a former Digital UNIX admin... (4, Interesting)

Minwee (522556) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908443)

...all I can say is that this would have been amazing news about ten years ago. Even five years ago it would have been pretty great.

Now? Well, it sounds like HPaq is just kicking it to the curb so it will probably be another year or two before anyone can beat it into a working filesystem for anything but HPucks. There is already no shortage of file systems that can do what AdvFS could do, so by the time it is ready for prime time prime time will have moved on.

Oh well. 1998 me is still pleased to hear this.

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (5, Interesting)

rahvin112 (446269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908607)

Linux Weekly News [lwn.net] has a comment from an HP developer indicating they aren't putting this out there so it can become a linux file system, but so that the lessons learned and parts of the code that are useful can be incorporated into one of the linux file systems of the future. I took it to mean, take our code and use whatever you can to make ext4 or ext5.
 
 

While it would be fine with HP if someone wants to "port" AdvFS to Linux or any other
operating system with a GPLv2 compatible license, this contribution is not intended to
"compete" with other existing file system projects underway in and around the kernel.org
development community.

Rather, our hope is that the algorithms, design documentation, and test suite now available at
the AdvFS site... and the active participation of HP engineers in various open-source file
system projects who have lots of AdvFS experience... will help to accelerate the inclusion of
AdvFS-like enterprise features and capabilities in next-generation file systems for Linux.

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (5, Funny)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908613)

Oh well. 1998 me is still pleased to hear this.
Is 1998 you still on the line? Warn him that Star Trek: Insurrection really sucks!

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (2, Funny)

youngdev (1238812) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908885)

you have a chance to impart some great information to someone of the past and you want to be a film critic? How lame.

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909073)

This is Slashdot! "News for nerds, stuff that matters." What could matter more to a nerd than a bad Star Trek film?!

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909847)

It was pre-ordained, Insurrection was film #9 and all Trek fans know that the odd numbered films suck.

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 6 years ago | (#23910111)

It was pre-ordained, Insurrection was film #9 and all Trek fans know that the odd numbered films suck.
Except the first one.

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908891)

That's all you'd tell your 1998 self?!?? I'd tell mine to invest heavily in the DotComs so he'd lose all his money...it'd be hilarious like that time someone told me they were my future self and that I should invest heavily in DotCom start-ups and I lost all my money!

Sorry but Nemesis is the sucky one... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909595)

...not Insurrection. It wasn't perfect or anything, but to say it sucks just goes too far.

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (5, Informative)

Curlsman (1041022) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908893)

This was the filesystem that HP tried to port to HPUX and failed. They licensed Veritas instead.
I figured that the multithreading that I'd always heard worked so well in AdvFS/Tru64 was hard to port to the non-multithreaded HPUX kernel.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,39175690,00.htm [zdnet.co.uk]
"It had initially planned to complete the migration of the TruCluster/AdvFS feature from Tru64 Unix to HP-UX 11i v3 in the middle of 2006."

http://forums12.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?admit=109447627+1214253121145+28353475&threadId=754760 [hp.com]
"No TruCluster or AdvFS for HP-UX after all"

Re:As a former Digital UNIX admin... (1)

V. Mole (9567) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909603)

it will probably be another year or two before anyone can beat it into a working filesystem for anything but HPucks.

Nitpick: it was never released with HP-UX. It was originally developed by DEC for their Unix product, originally OSF/1, currently called Tru64.

Good News Indeed (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908555)

I used ADVFS when I worked at DEC/Compaq. It is a really nice filesystem to use.
If the utilities are GPL's as well that is even better news.

Copying whole filesystems is a breeze as is copying filesystem trees and traversing over volume mount points ( ie not including mount points and all their files.)

It also gives you the ability to add/remove extra space to mounted volumes just like LVM does but IMHO without having to pre allocate it.
I would expect that some of the features may well be in EXT4 but I think that some of the Utilities could be made to use EXT4. /S
 

Re:Good News Indeed (4, Informative)

Lennie (16154) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909431)

To answer your question, yes the utilities are user GPL-license.

What's the obsession with filesystems? (3, Insightful)

pschmied (5648) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908579)

Certainly the Linux community doesn't really need to burn energy supporting a half dozen filesystems.

Talk to six linux admins and you'll get at least that many "every filesystem but the one I'm using sucks!" responses.

I'd gladly stand up for a lack of choice on the filesystem front. Pick one, make sure it's absolutely tested, make sure it supports a nice range of features.

Integrating a filesystem into another OS is a decidedly non-trivial task unless you just want to read files.

Thanks, HP, but I don't really want your no-longer-commercially-viable undead zombieware.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (3, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908707)

But then you end up with the windows situation, where they only support NTFS (or FAT32, but who uses that). I don't think that any 1 file system is optimal for all tasks that one would want to use a computer for. People use computers for many different things. It makes complete sense to have file systems that accommodate the needs of different people.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (1)

pschmied (5648) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909207)

There are a lot of problems with Windows, but one sentiment I've never heard from any Windows admin is, "Gee, I wish I could reformat all my servers to use ext3."

Accommodating the needs of different people is great, but maybe we could accommodate the needs of different people with fewer superfluous choices which ultimately degrade the experience of all of said choices.

Which list of subtle filesystem problems will plague this new entrant into the Linux filesystem melee?

Windows effectively has Old FS and New FS. Apple has Old FS and is moving toward New FS. Solaris has Old FS and New FS. This isn't rocket science.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (2, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909331)

Well, for Linux, I would say that you have Ext2, and Ext3, and that I guess Ext4, which will be the NewFS. If you aren't at all concerned with the differences, then just use EXT. I don't think a larger percentage of people run anything else. However, I think that having a system that assumes that there will be other file systems makes it a lot more flexible. Have you ever wondered why it's so hard to get good EXT2/3 support windows. It's specifically because it was written from the point of view, that nobody would ever want to use any file system, other than NTFS or FAT. So it's inherently hard to get any other file system working with it. If you work with the idea that some people may want other file systems, it doesn't end up as so much of a problem. I wouldn't want to run my servers using EXT3, but it sure would be nice to be able to mount my Ext file systems when I dual book into windows. I know it can be done, but all the solutions seem like big kludges, that only half work.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908787)

Exactly! They should just create a data structure and search algorithm with O(1) in all use cases.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (3, Insightful)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909065)

Exactly! They should just create a data structure and search algorithm with O(1) in all use cases.

Linux has that, it's called /dev/null

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (1)

pschmied (5648) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909229)

Ignoring my grandmothers dying words advising me to not feed the trolls:

\sarcasm{Yes. This is precisely what I'm advocating.}

What part of "take one filesystem and make it good" warrants creating a strawman implying that I'm advocating for the total abolition of filesystems?

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909123)

Certainly the Linux community doesn't really need to burn energy supporting a half dozen filesystems.
Or a hundred different distros. Yet they do exist.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909247)

I'd gladly stand up for a lack of choice on the filesystem front. Pick one, make sure it's absolutely tested, make sure it supports a nice range of features.

Absolutely! I'm tired of having to pick different filesystems for flash and RAID-0/SCSI-320 volumes when their needs and abilities are obviously identical.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (1)

pschmied (5648) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909587)

We were clearly talking about general purpose filesystems here. Tell me again how AdvFS is any more applicable to flash than Ext3, NTFS, or JoeysBBQFS to the flash scenario you've outlined here?

While you're setting up strawmen, you forgot to include iso9660, UDF, 12 dozen network-based filesystems, half a dozen SAN filesystems, etc. etc.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909785)

I must admit I never ventured past the ext* systems myself. I'm sure there'd be some improvements but on the other hand my system was working just fine. I do see that when you're trying to build a Linux server for a specific purpose, like say a database server then it's not all the same though. Msnu file systems show many people care about Linux filesystem performance, I'd be more worried if noone gave a damn. As for the perfect file system, it isn't built yet. Even the ZFS of much praise have trouble doing things like expanding arrays and such. And I'm not really complain if I end up with an "enterprise" class filesystem for free, just the way I got an enterprise OS kernel for free. I can think of worse ways to burn energy, and burn it does. But that's ok though, because I'd rather have people work on the things they do like rather than not working on the things they don't.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (2, Informative)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909899)

Integrating a filesystem into another OS is a decidedly non-trivial task unless you just want to read files.
Write a FUSE driver. Problem nonexistent.

As for "too much choice", you may prefer to solve every problem with a hammer but I prefer a toolbox.

Re:What's the obsession with filesystems? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23910005)

Yes, but all the Linux admins are wrong because every Linux filesystem sucks. They should be using UFS2/soft-updates. ;)

Aha! (1)

Geek of Tech (678002) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908611)

But can it run Linu... oh... right.

how soon before MS or one of their lackies.... (0, Troll)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908681)

claim this? I think that I hear SCO lawyers already knocking on the door.

Re:how soon before MS or one of their lackies.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908825)

Oh wow are you ever witty, Mr. FunnyMan! But seriously, I think you're a fucking jerkoff.

Re:how soon before MS or one of their lackies.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23909071)

wow; coming from somebody like you, that was impressive.

Just what we needed! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908697)

Another ReiserFS killer!

I'm waiting for Reiser4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23908743)

Why use this second rate filesystem when you can use the revolutionary Reiser4 designed by World Famous Computer Scientist Hans Reiser?

Take him for ballast... (1)

mkcmkc (197982) | more than 6 years ago | (#23908855)

I'm always happy to see a company GPL code, but I have to say that having used both, I think ext3 is considerably more solid than AdvFS...

Interesting (3, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909233)

Everyone has been looking at ZFS to provide a whole lot of this same feature set, but the CDDL license has been a significant stumbling block. Releasing AdvFS as GPL could actually put it in the running for real world adoption and use on a large scale. I think Sun already considered this a battle won and may now have to rethink their strategy. If they released Sun as GPL in the next month, I'd be willing to bet AdvFS would probably be largely ignored and become a historical footnote. If Sun waits and lets it gain traction (as they tend to do) it could be they will find themselves with another cool technology they sat on too long and which has been replaced y the OSS community.

Filesystems and BIOSs are interesting (1)

suggsjc (726146) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909305)

I find filesystems and BIOSs intriguing. They are kinda like voodoo, in that you don't really see or configure them (to a certain extent). They do what they do and you don't think about them. However, they can (possibly) have more impact on performance that any tweaks you can do (kernel or application).

I know that some people (read: sysadmins) definitely do think about their filesystem, but even then its usually only when you are installing a system or in the event something goes wrong.

Tru64 goodness (5, Interesting)

JayMcB74 (1312899) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909701)

I really hope everyone will join me in thanking HP for this and encourage them to release more of the Tru64 OS, HP has been on my $&!â list since they bought and buried this years ago. They are sitting on so much good IP that I really wish that they would only make printers and just the 4000+ series at that.

Re:Tru64 goodness (2, Interesting)

cparker15 (779546) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909971)

I'm glad I expanded my threshold before I posted the comment I was originally going to post. HP just donated a whole bunch of their code to the community, and people are so ungrateful that they're actually complaining about it. Huh??!

Thanks, HP! :)

Small File system, native support, please.. please (1)

tempest69 (572798) | more than 6 years ago | (#23909903)

Ok, I understand the reasons for moving from Ext2 to ext3.. but then all this effort to support a bunch of Me-too's journaled file systems each with some marginal improvements over the rest of a crowded field. It seems like a bunch of work for a minor payoff.... The problem that I see that isnt addresses in native linux file systems is small files. try and copy a folder with 50k files each sized from 1k to 10 k each 100 meg total.. so copying a tar file with this much information is an operation that can occur in 4 seconds or less. BUT as small files it is not even close to as fast.. the copy time can run 40 minutes... the file system isnt right for this kind of work. Anyway I would like to see a much wider array of file systems out there.. especially a file system that is designed to handle small files in a manner which is near the operation bandwidth of a conventional hard drive. Now I'm aware that this isnt a concern for a bunch of people.. but it really should be.. small files are what cause really nasty bottlenecks. look at windows it loads information off the hard drive way too slow during bootup

End-of-life open sourcing (0, Flamebait)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#23910033)

This is another end-of-life open sourcing. Tru64 is a legacy OS from the 1980s, but it still has some users, so HP is dumping the code out there.

If only... What could have been w/o HP's NIH issue (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23910091)

The irony of this is that Tru64, at the time of the HP/Compaq debacle, had (my estimate) 99% of the SVR4 compatibility layer complete and could have been vetted as HP-UX on Alpha and Itanium by recompiling the HP-UX environment on top of the Mach kernel that runs Tru64. The key is that Tru64 is itself simply a UNIX compatibility layer on top of Mach 2.5. The Itanium port was essentially complete at the time. This would have given HP-UX TruCluster and AdvFS functionality as well as providing Tru64 users a viable path forward under the HP banner rather than the wholesale defection that occurred. I find it interesting that HP is continuing to extend the lifetime of a "dead" product - now to 2012.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...