Beta
×

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!

Microsoft Announces ReFS, a New Filesystem For Windows 8

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the comes-with-striped-shirt dept.

Microsoft 459

bonch writes "Microsoft has shared details about its new filesystem called ReFS, which stands for Resilient File System. Codenamed 'Protogon,' ReFS will first appear as the storage system for Windows Server and later be offered to Windows clients. Microsoft plans to deprecate lesser-used NTFS features while maintaining 'a high degree of compatibility' for most uses. NTFS has been criticized in the past for its inelegant architecture."

cancel ×

459 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

My preview of ReFS (5, Funny)

TechGuys (2554082) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724884)

After my initial tests, I must say that ReFS is incredible advangement. ReFS supports named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes and quotas. It is basically all the best filesystems compiled into one.

Not only is this good for Windows system, but overall network architecture.

Re:My preview of ReFS (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38724928)

How does it compare to ZFS in terms of resilience? After all, it's in the damn name.

Re:My preview of ReFS (-1, Offtopic)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724940)

So, you are a troll, posing as a MS shill (no way they could be as incompetent to use someone like you) to make MS look bad?

Trust me, they don't need the help.

Re:My preview of ReFS (4, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725234)

Not everything that Microsoft makes is bad. Just because someone says a particular product or technology is good doesn't make them a troll. In fact, as much as Windows drives me up a wall, I am a really big fan of Microsoft Security Essentials.

Assuming that everything Microsoft is terrible conversely is trolling.

Re:My preview of ReFS (4, Insightful)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725464)

Actually for Windows MSE works pretty decent compared to the others with seeming less resource usage. Didn't they purchase that technology from someone else? I can't remember. However TechGuys is a known paid shill. At this point I don't even know why he bothers. The problem with this new filesystem is that it features very poor interoperability with non Microsoft products leaving your data at the mercy of Microsoft even worse than before. Now-a-days you can boot up Windows computer with a Linux live CD and rescue your files when windows is borked. That won't happen now. Microsort is doing everything in their power to break interoperability with open source and competing operating systems.

Re:My preview of ReFS (4, Informative)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725532)

TechGuy's a troll who's gotten the most first-posts in the last week AND every one has either promoted an MS product or bashed a Google one. One even said "Use Silverlight instead of Dreamweaver for making a website".

Re:My preview of ReFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725684)

Because a sandwich is just like a car!

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

Phics (934282) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725700)

Nah... pretty much everything they make is crap. That's why they buy companies like Sybari [wikipedia.org] .

Re:My preview of ReFS (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725424)

So, you are a troll, posing as a MS shill ...

really now.

Interpret the GP's post anyway you want. But here's my take on MS in 2012:

A large company in its Cash Cow phase of its life cycle using its gigantic clout and cash reserves to try to innovate in its struggle to stay relevant. After all, Apple is now kicking MS' ass. Big time.

So what's happening?

MS is innovating. They're using their obscene cash horde and are grasping at straws - like AT&T did before they became the current evil marketing trolls that they are now.

They are producing some interesting work and innovations in their struggle to stay relevant and domineering in the market place. Speaking as a "high tech" investor, MS is considered a Dog. An also ran. A No Factor.

I'm an ex-techie Wall Street guy - we think MS is an ex-beauty queen old hag who thinks she still can fuck any guy she wants. Ballmer is starting to get the drift.And he's really pushing for MS to become .... ????

Ballmer needs to retire and become a maven of charity like Bill for us to become comfortable.In the meantime, MS can become something like Apple. Really, they can - at least I believe that; No. I have no position in MS nor do I plan on getting one.

tl;dr MS haters, get a grip, It's not 1990 anymore.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725678)

Uh, apple is in the exact same panic - have you not seen their lawsuit attempts against android?

hint: it isn't stopping the competition.

Re:My preview of ReFS (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725574)

DavidSell [slashdot.org] , ByOhTek [slashdot.org] , antitithenai [slashdot.org] , Bonch [slashdot.org] , Dtech [slashdot.org] and others are psuedonyms/sockpuppets used by the Waggener Edstrom rapid response team employed by MS to astroturf discussions in favour of MS and to attack any point of view which isn't favourable to MS and supportive of their interests.

http://waggeneredstrom.com/about/approach [waggeneredstrom.com]

Mod accordingly

Re:My preview of ReFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725672)

evidence that links those accounts? (before you get modded up for rumor)

Re:My preview of ReFS (4, Insightful)

Anon-Admin (443764) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724946)

So they are starting to catch up with the ext3 filesystem.

Re:My preview of ReFS (2, Informative)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725140)

So they are starting to catch up with the ext3 filesystem.

I thought it sounded pretty much like a dumbed down version of AFS... from the early 90s. The problem is I never use any of that extra stuff because I have no use for it. I don't remember if I can do sparse with AFS because I don't care about sparse. At home I do the openafs thing for linux, mac, and windoze and everything is in AFS, so I don't really care what windows uses natively, its just kind of a bootloader to get to my real files over afs.

I hope there is a way to disable file level compression, because nothing sucks worse than shoving pre-compressed media files into and out of another compressor. Also it screws CPU performance in favor of storage space... So my storage is limitless or its incompressible data, but my CPU gaming cycles are limited, I'm not seeing this turn out well.

Re:My preview of ReFS (4, Informative)

SpryGuy (206254) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725220)

You need to RTFA. The grandparent was a spoof. ReFS doesn't support compression. Or short-names. etc.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725258)

Supposedly they also support pools across multiple devices of different sizes that can be reallocated dynamically.

In that regard, it is more like zfs and btrfs, and on par with the best filesystems out there.

I'm curious what performance is like.

Re:My preview of ReFS (4, Funny)

gnalre (323830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724948)

After my initial tests, I must say that ReFS is incredible advangement. ReFS supports named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes and quotas. It is basically all the best filesystems compiled into one.

Not only is this good for Windows system, but overall network architecture.

and of course will be an open standard(Sarcasm Alert)

Re:My preview of ReFS (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725714)

That thought crossed my mind, there are legitimate reasons for ditching NTFS, but I can't help but wonder if this has anything to do with Win 8 being the first release in a long time where they weren't under DoJ supervision. Also, at this point, NTFS support on other OSes is pretty good. Seems like a really convenient way of making it inconvenient to interoperate or multiboot.

Re:My preview of ReFS (5, Informative)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724958)

That's very interesting given the article says

There are some NTFS features for which Microsoft plans to drop support with ReFS, specifically named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes, and quotas, Verma blogged. That said, one of Microsoftâ(TM)s goals with ReFS is to âoemaintain a high degree of compatibility with a subset of NTFS features that are widely adopted while deprecating others that provide limited value at the cost of system complexity and footprint,â Verma said.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725314)

Some of those features are actually useful:

Compression comes into handy for dealing with directories full of log files.

File level encryption is useful for volumes where BitLocker can't be used.

Sparse files are extremely useful.

As for quotas, unless they have another layer for warning/enforcement, how will places keep users from filling up their home directories?

I'm hoping ReFS is up to ZFS with needed features, such as deduplication, encryption, an analog of RAID-Z, the filesystem working with the LVM layer (or even replacing it), and so on. Otherwise, people will just shrug and keep NTFS as their default fs of choice because it has been around for so long.

Re:My preview of ReFS (3, Informative)

compro01 (777531) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725398)

Some of those features are actually useful

Yes, and they're DROPPING those features.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725722)

Missed that whooshing sound, did you?

Re:My preview of ReFS (3, Interesting)

ledow (319597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724960)

Great. What does that mean for users?

Amateurs: Nothing at all.
"Know-a-bit's": Almost nothing.
Professional users: Nothing we couldn't do before.
State-of-the-art, top-dog, storage-gods: Nothing very special or new at all.

Now, if you'd said that it finally supported WinFS-style file tagging and searching, then you'd have ticked lots of boxes for all manner of users. As it is, it's a "slightly better filesystem than before" and hardly newsworthy (out of all your "features", I only spot one that you can't already do with Windows alone and that would ever be exposed to someone NOT using bit-level access to the drive - file level encryption).

Re:My preview of ReFS (5, Funny)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725036)

End users: We still live in a world of 8.3 filenames. Sorry. Till the last PC is burned in a bonfire...

You know what would be a funny graph of google data? How many are still serving up .htm files instead of .html files vs year.

20 years from now my grandkids are going to have to answer on Jeopardy why computer filenames are still in a 8.3 filename format.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725176)

Where do you find your files? I haven't seen an 8.3 for many years, and I work in a hospital research group that still deploys XP images on new computers (and runs its webmail with outlook 2003, argh).

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

tgeek (941867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725430)

All over the place. There's still a great many widely used software packages that evolved from and still use DOS/8.3 file naming. One example: Peachtree Accounting (in various flavors).

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725538)

Doesn't mean they aren't there. FAT is still pervasive enough that you can't get away from 8.3. All you have to do is look at Movie and Music/Sound files, they all are .m4v and .mp3 and .wma and so on.

Here's one, how do you tell the difference between avatar.m4v and avatar.m4v and which one is the crappy action adaption of a cartoon and which one was the crappy cartoon masking as an action flick?

Re:My preview of ReFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725550)

setup.exe .rdp .txt .log .msi .dll

Shall I continue? If you run a "PC" you will have these on your computer.

Re:My preview of ReFS (2)

NJRoadfan (1254248) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724968)

Umm, aren't those the features being dropped?

Re:My preview of ReFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38724992)

It's worth noting NTFS already has most (if not all) of the features you quoted.

Time will tell if it is better designed or behaved than NTFS; but users can already use NTFS to do everything you mentioned.

Re:My preview of ReFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725142)

Moreover, these are exactly the features being dropped in transition from NTFS to ReFS.

My Preview of Cold Fusion Reactors (3, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725032)

After my initial tests

Wait, what? From the article:

Officially named ReFS — for Resilient File System — the new file system will be made available via a staged “evolution,” according to a January 16 post on the “Building Windows 8 blog.

So you're saying something that was just announced and will be made available via a staged evolution has already been tested by you? Impressive!

It is basically all the best filesystems compiled into one.

Thanks for summing it up for me there, bud. I didn't realize it was the greatest goddamn filesystem I could imagine, why didn't you just say "Imagine what your dream filesystem will be able to do, this is it." I wonder though, will it have the homicide capacity of ReiserFS?

This reminds me of my initial tests of cold fusion. I must say that cold fusion is incredible dvangement. Cold fusion supports providing us with unlimited power from a glass of water, it prints money, it gives the user eternal life, it allows the user to travel faster than the speed of life and -- when activated -- attractive women jump out of the core reactor demanding money shot after money shot.

Re:My Preview of Cold Fusion Reactors (2)

anonymov (1768712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725144)

It gets better:

TFA:

some NTFS features for which Microsoft plans to drop support with ReFS, specifically named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes, and quotas, Verma blogged.

His post:

I must say that ReFS is incredible advangement. ReFS supports named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes and quotas

He's either overpaid as MS shill, or underpaid as dark PR style "obviously dumb MS shill" troll.

Re:My Preview of Cold Fusion Reactors (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725468)

Maybe he's just, like, stupid. Sorry, he left himself wide open.

Re:My Preview of Cold Fusion Reactors (1)

anonymov (1768712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725602)

Maybe he's just, like, stupid.

It's covered by second part. Smart new media marketing should pay idiots (what a widely available resource!) to go and promote opposing products. It'll make their own fanbase and product stand out in contrast. Maybe that already happens?

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725092)

I'm gonna assume your comment was lost because you needed sarcasm font.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1, Flamebait)

fibonacci8 (260615) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725230)

http://slashdot.org/~bonch [slashdot.org] Note the collaboration between this, and numerous other "contributors" between extremely verbose first posts submitted within the same minute as their submitted articles. How much are you getting paid to game slashdot? Evidence: check how many contributors defend first posts that are clearly prepped to send immediately after a story goes live. Humans don't tend to type more than 200 words per minute in response to actual news. But shills who get paid to post do.

Re:My preview of ReFS (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725384)

Or maybe, just maybe, his post is actually a joke, wherein he copy/pasted the list of features being dropped (see paragraph 5 in TFA), claiming they were the advancements.

But no, conspiracy theories are much more fun.

Full of sound and fury, signifying an idiot (1, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725386)

Note the collaboration between this, and numerous other "contributors" between extremely verbose first posts submitted within the same minute

It's called "being a subscriber". Since you don't even know that we can all just assume you've not ever been one and are just a leech.

As for "being paid", I don't know that many people are paying to have humorous articles posted to Slashdot.

You did realize his post was humor, right? It was not to subtle for you to comprehend, right?

Oh.

Re:My preview of ReFS (2)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725354)

Yes troll but it features POOR interoperability. No thanks.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725372)

After my initial tests, I must say that ReFS is incredible advangement. ReFS supports named streams, object IDs, short names, compression, file level encryption (EFS), user data transactions, sparse, hard-links, extended attributes and quotas. It is basically all the best filesystems compiled into one.

We have a cautionary fairy tale here about the cat and the dog baking a cake. Since they don't know how to bake a tasty cake, they decide to put every tasty ingredient they know into the mix. So then naturally include flour, milk, butter, eggs, whipped cream, bones, mice, sausages, candies, chocolate, pork cracklings, sauce...and so on, except for bread, which neither cats nor dogs seem to like. Well, I guess you can guess what they got in the end.

Re:My preview of ReFS (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725648)

names don't change the game. We know a troll when we see it and will call you out every time for it. [slashdot.org]

Shills, begone!

After your initial tests, I'd say you're full of crap because it hasn't even been implemented yet.

Re:My preview of ReFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725650)

Yes, but will ReFS [wikipedia.org] cause Microsoft to murder Yahoo?

Starts with 'R' (5, Funny)

uigrad_2000 (398500) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724954)

This is a bad idea.

Now we can count on some guy named 'Hans Resilient" to be tried and found guilty of murder.

Re:Starts with 'R' (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725304)

And you wonder why you nerds can't get laid.

linux driver (0)

stanlyb (1839382) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724982)

Until there is no linux driver for this new FS, i am not going to switch. Not, Ever.

Re:linux driver (5, Funny)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725122)

There's already no Linux driver for it... so does that mean you're going to switch? And if someone makes a Linux driver will you switch back to not using it?

Re:linux driver (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725190)

Maybe he means something like with SecureBoot, he will never be able to run linux again, so not having a filesystem driver won't matter, or something like that, so he's not switching?

Re:linux driver (1)

stanlyb (1839382) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725224)

I mean i am not going to use this new FS. NTFS is mature enough for me, for Win7 and linux.

Re:linux driver (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725472)

Damn right. I'm not going to use the hell out of it!

Re:linux driver (5, Insightful)

NJRoadfan (1254248) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725168)

That might be motivation for creating ReFS. Third party NTFS drivers finally became mature enough to safely read/write the file system... so lets create a new undocumented filesystem and make data exchange between other OSes a PITA again. It also means WinFS is completely dead and never coming back.

Interesting (4, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38724998)

I can't say that I've ever used any of the NTFS features they're planning to drop.

I do wish Windows had a sane soft-link system like *nix does; I've yet to run into an application that automatically dereferences a .lnk when opening it. You have to futz around with opening the link manually, reading it's redirect, and then opening THAT instead. Very crude and ugly.

But more to the point, I didn't see much about what might be NEW with this file system, only what's OLD and being discarded.

Mind you, some basic feature cleanup never hurt anyone. But if that's the case, why not NTFS2 instead of a marketing buzzword?

Re:Interesting (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725026)

Typo: I meant "API", not "application".

Re:Interesting (5, Informative)

EvanED (569694) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725086)

I do wish Windows had a sane soft-link system like *nix does; I've yet to run into an application that automatically dereferences a .lnk when opening it. You have to futz around with opening the link manually, reading it's redirect, and then opening THAT instead. Very crude and ugly.

Man, if only [microsoft.com] .

(OK, it's not quite sane considering you have to distinguish between links to files and links to directories at creation time. I'm not sure what happens if you flip it behind its back.)

Re:Interesting (1)

EvanED (569694) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725136)

(OK, it's not quite sane considering you have to distinguish between links to files and links to directories at creation time. I'm not sure what happens if you flip it behind its back.)

Also, I think that under the default setup you have to be admin to create links.

I think I've read some "reason" for that but I forget what it was.

Re:Interesting (1)

dkf (304284) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725210)

Also, I think that under the default setup you have to be admin to create links.

That'll be to create hard links to directories, which is a Bad Idea everywhere. Symbolic links to directories are fine though, and can be created by ordinary users (with the right tool; Windows doesn't come with anything like 'ln' by default).

Re:Interesting (2)

anonymov (1768712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725640)

mklink can create symlinks (which were introduced with NT6.0's update to NTFS)/hardlink/dir junctions and is available out of the box since Vista/Server 2008. There's "fsutil hardlink" command on earlier systems, but to create directory junctions you had to install Resource Kit's linkd or Russinovich's Junction.

Re:Interesting (1)

Malc (1751) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725186)

Why are you referring to shortcut files? That's something entirely different.

Re:Interesting (1)

Miamicanes (730264) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725624)

He's not. Lost amidst the orgy of hate for Vista was the fact that it did, in fact, finally give us real, honest-to-god symlinks, so it's no longer necessary to use NTFS junctions to kludge directory symlinks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mklink [wikipedia.org]

The bad news is, there's an ambiguous set of Group Policy settings that work together in non-obvious ways to create a perverse scenario where the only users who CAN'T create symlinks are users with local admin privileges. In other words, anybody who doesn't have local admin rights (including the guest user) can create symlinks wherever they're allowed to create files, but if you DO have local admin rights, mklink will fail.

Re:Interesting (5, Informative)

anonymov (1768712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725280)

There's a blog post [msdn.com] linked from the article.

There's all kinds of promising stuff, like data corruption resilience and dropped/extended limits.

Much more interesting read than the linked ZDNet article.

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725318)

I do wish Windows had a sane soft-link system like *nix does; I've yet to run into an application that automatically dereferences a .lnk when opening it. You have to futz around with opening the link manually, reading it's redirect, and then opening THAT instead. Very crude and ugly.

.lnk's are shortcuts, not symlinks. They're basically a shell thing. If you want soft links, use soft links. NTFSLink will put it in your context menu I believe.

Re:Interesting (4, Informative)

SpryGuy (206254) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725332)

But more to the point, I didn't see much about what might be NEW with this file system, only what's OLD and being discarded.

Let's see: 32K file name and path limits (instad of 255), on-line recovery from corruption (no more "Check Disk" or offline recovery-rebuild), faster performance, built in recovery of data on failed disks (via Storage Spaces), hot-adding-more-storage to volumes, better control of allocation and localization on the drive, attribute checksums (and auto detection and recovery from "bitrot")....

Did you RTFA at all?

Re:Interesting (1)

WillerZ (814133) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725698)

NTFS already supports paths longer than 255 bytes; you just need to use the right APIs to access them.

It used to really piss me off that the JVMs for Windows weren't using the long-path APIs. It stopped annoying me when I stopped needing to write Java programs.

Re:Interesting (2)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725544)

NTFS supports softlinks, (junction points) its just none of the user land stuff that ships on the Windows platform knows how to deal with it.

Explorer for instance can't create them, and indicate that something is a link, and can't correctly total up disk usage for a tree if you have used them in that tree.

 

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725622)

Depending on what applications you have used, you probably have actually used hardlinks without knowing about it.

For example Mercurial uses them to create clones:
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/HardlinkedClones

Transitional (1)

virgnarus (1949790) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725636)

But more to the point, I didn't see much about what might be NEW with this file system, only what's OLD and being discarded.

Mind you, some basic feature cleanup never hurt anyone. But if that's the case, why not NTFS2 instead of a marketing buzzword?

The article hints in various areas that they are restricted by maintaining a high level of compatibility. ReFS is merely a transitional FS from NTFS, and as an unfortunate result it carries some of that burden with being compliant to a high compatibility standard. Part of me thinks this may be the "Vista" of file systems (much of what caused Vista to be awful was due to extreme efforts to maintain compatibility), but I will be critically optimistic about it, given the changes it advertises.

On a side note, the original MSDN blog confuses me on a couple things, namely their statement on deduplication. While they say the ReFS itself does not natively incorporate deduplication, but - like NTFS - will permit 3rd-party support of it, why is it that people have found [osronline.com] new FSCTL ops for it in the Win8 header files? Maybe they dropped it? Curious.

Great! (2, Insightful)

Sez Zero (586611) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725000)

All we need is another MS-specific filesystem to cause compatibility headaches.

Re:Great! (3, Insightful)

uigrad_2000 (398500) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725340)

I'll agree.

As ugly as NTFS is, the one thing I've liked about it is that it's the only FS used by Windows and Windows Servers for a dozen years.

With Linux, on the other hand, I've had to deal with ext2, ResierFS, ext3, ext4, and those are only the popular ones! There are a ton of other specialized filesystems for other features, such as encryption or use on flash memory!

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725702)

I'm not sure what you mean by "had to deal with". I use Linux daily and it doesn't make any difference to me what filesystem is being used.

Dropped features (2)

snsh (968808) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725064)

Dropping support for compressed folders and hard links? I use those features all the time. Especially when you troubleshoot a server with a subfolder containing 12GB of log files, and have no direction or policy about what to do with those old log files, you could safely enable compression on the folder and they magically take up less space.

Re:Dropped features (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725178)

How do you give a file a name, without hard links?

(Yeah, yeah, I have a strong UNIX bias)

Re:Dropped features (1)

MagicM (85041) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725262)

compressed folders + truecrypt + robocopy also makes a wonderful hassle-free backup system.

You gotta be kidding me?! (5, Funny)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725066)

From the blog post: [msdn.com]

Today, NTFS is the most widely used, advanced, and feature rich file system in broad use.

If this is true...it's a very sad world we live in...

Totally agree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725404)

What could be sadder in this modern life?

Re:You gotta be kidding me?! (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725446)

Whats not to like about NTFS? All my portable harddisks and my primary data partition uses NTFS. It is supported well by Windows, Linux and Mac, and can support most commonly used partition sizes.

As the best boss I ever had used to ask: (2)

vikingpower (768921) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725090)

1) which problem does this solve ?

2) if the answer at #1) is not "null", then how monkeyproof is it ?

Sooo, can I still use FAT16? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725132)

I still have devices that need FAT16/FAT12. Can I still use that?

Warning (5, Funny)

TBedsaul (95979) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725138)

If you're married to "Hans Resilient", you'll want to start running now.

Same thing as with WinFS ... (1)

yvesdandoy (44789) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725148)

"va-pour-wa-re" until it is available (which never happened to WinFS)

By the way ... do anyone even remember WinFS ?

More things to patent.... (5, Funny)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725162)

Sounds like they're due for a refresh so they can get some new patents on their filesystem to make sure all the device makers need to continue to pay them money.

Re:More things to patent.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725214)

Yea cause device makers REALLY took to NTFS right?

Re:More things to patent.... (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725370)

No, but if you want to use long filenames on say, your android phone, and being able to connect that to a windows machine MS gets a licence fee. That applies to pretty much all devices. That's a FAT32 patent though, and I'm wondering (somewhat seriously) if they don't have anything worthwhile for enforcing on NTFS so that's part of why they're looking for something new.

why not jump on btrfs bandwagon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725250)

1. Make the kernel support multiple filesystem (which I think it already does), write a wrapper for btrfs

2. ???

3. Enjoy peace and harmony

Granted, I have no slightest clue on what are these streams that virii hide in are, but I doubt they are very useful as no one is moaning for supporting such in Linux. Are there more incompatibilities?

NTFS up to EXT4 speeds? (4, Interesting)

Moses48 (1849872) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725326)

I'm not a filesystem guru. I stick to programming in the application space mostly. But I have noticed a large time discrepency compiling a large project using EXT4 vs NTFS. EXT4 being multiple times faster then doing the same compile on an NTFS. My question now is, will ReFS bring those times up to similar values?

PS. Also looking at the dropped support for short names, i think quite a few server batch files will be broken.

Re:NTFS up to EXT4 speeds? (2)

SpryGuy (206254) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725376)

I've heard anecdotal evidence (so take with a grain of salt) that doing stuff on ReFS is much faster.

Keep in mind this initial release is for servers only, and NOT for boot volumes, so it'll be a while (half a decade or more) before it trickles down into most desktops/laptops.

Re:NTFS up to EXT4 speeds? (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725666)

Turn off last access time and you can get faster compiles on NTFS, but it was never a particularly fast FS, just a very reliable one. The AOW architecture in ReFS will help with the situation because metadata updates will become large streaming writes instead of small random ones.

Personally I'm loving the idea of data integrity streams with mirrored spaces, I hope that they implement ANSI T10 DIF so that you can have end to end data integrity from disk to application.

Just like the new filesystem with Vista (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725390)

Are they actually going to release this one? I remember one of the big features of Vista was to be their new filesystem Win FS [cnet.com] . Although, I guess Microsoft had enough criticisms to deal with in Vista [wikipedia.org] that it could have been even more of a disaster to release a new filesystem with it.

Apple: Ditch HFS+ (1)

Arakageeta (671142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725394)

Well, Apple, it looks like you'll be the last major OS still running a terribly out of date file system. Ditch HFS+!

Re:Apple: Ditch HFS+ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725498)

At one point they were part way through migrating to ZFS... but given what's gone on with Oracle and licensing since, I think I now understand why that project died.

Why not EXT (1)

ripdajacker (1167101) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725418)

I don't get why they don't go with EXT4 or something in that fashion.

Re:Why not EXT (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725634)

There's absolutely no comparison between EXT4 and something like ReFS (which bares more similarity with the likes of ZFS and BTRFS). Completely different worlds. BTRFS is being developed specifically to supplant EXT4.

Re:Why not EXT (1)

Bananana (1749762) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725682)

It is a stupid question. If MS was willing to do this kind of thing, it could have ported win32 and the windows GUI on top of linux. That way they would have a solid feature-rich O/S and compatibility with Win s/w.

Microsoft plans to deprecate lesser-used features (4, Insightful)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725436)

"Microsoft plans to deprecate lesser-used features" --- such as the reasonable level of compatibility that has started to show up in non-Microsoft implementations of NTFS over the last couple of years. We may be assured that ReFS is a patent minefield.

Re:Microsoft plans to deprecate lesser-used featur (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725628)

Microsoft will of course provide complete documentation of the new filesystem, and direct their developers to help 3rd party implementations, just like they do with Samba.

like what was supposed to be in vista ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725494)

Wasn't vista supposed to offer all sorts of cool new stuff, like a better file system ?
OR
is their an upcoming oracle/google/android filesystem that is impacted by the MS announcement ?

When NTFS was introduced... (5, Interesting)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725552)

... it was hyped, among other things, as a file system that would never need to be defragmented.

.
I have to wonder how much of the pre-release ReFS hype will prove to be true in the coming years.

Compatibility Grief is What I See Coming (3, Insightful)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725592)

All the file utilities for both Mac and PC and how you handle these different systems including forward/backward compatibility, Parallels, VMWare, Backup software, hard drives and tape devices will all go through teeth nashing debugs as we try to get everything to work with a new file system.

That may be OK when you are an IT professional.

For someone who "just wants it to work" there is likely to be lots of surprises ahead.

After years and years of NTFS praises... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38725644)

And now we'll hear the paid astroturfing M$ shills who invaded /. with their 7 digits IDs explaining us that those "lesser used NTFS features" that are now going to disappear really weren't that great... While for years we had these shills explaining us how one of the reason Windows was so much secure than the various Un*xes out there was due to all these NTFS features.

NTFS is resilient! (4, Interesting)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725690)

A few weeks ago, I pulled "Hail Mary" with regards to saving an SBS 2003 server. For whatever reason, the server would not boot after a power failure. The RAID cache was not dirty on the card, and the RAID volume passed a manual parity consistency check. Unfortunately, the server would still not boot into the OS. It kept throwing a BSOD or hung at finding the hal.dll file. Attempting to access the recovery console or other F8 invoked options failed. Any Server 2003 disk would throw a BSOD the moment it attempted to mount the boot "C" volume. It wasn't the RAID drivers, but actual NTFS corruption causing the kernel panic. Serious shit. However, a Server 2008 R2 disk did save my ass. I was able to mount the volume through a command recovery console. A chkdsk revealed massive amounts of corruption. Server is fucked right? NO! A "chkdsk /R" command was able to find and repair all errors. No data loss what-so-ever.

Basically, the server must have been busy with installing updates or something when the power died. An old UPS battery will do that. But this goes to show how remarkably resilient the NTFS system is. Absolute respect!

Original MSDN Blog (Full details) (2)

virgnarus (1949790) | more than 2 years ago | (#38725708)

The summary links to a blog commenting on the new public release. The most relevant blog is present on the MSDN here [msdn.com] .

While Mary-Jo Foley's blog has a link to it, this saves the hassle of hopping a bit to get to the nitty gritty.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>