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!

Mac OS X to Get Journaling FS

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the journal-this dept.

Apple 691

overunderunderdone writes "According to eWeek, Apple Computer is planning to introduce a new journaling file system code-named 'Elvis' with the 10.2.2 release. Supposedly it will run on top of HFS+ and will be turned off by default. Though it will cost you 10% to 15% performance penalty the article says it is more extensive than NTFS and is on par with BeOS's 64-bit journaling file system. Not surprising since it is being developed by the same person - Dominic Giampaolo." I've been super impressed by OS X having used it as my primary laptop for the last couple weeks. It really is a great unix box- and this is one of the important missing puzzle pieces.

cancel ×

691 comments

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

You can give me a journaling FS (5, Funny)

Faggot (614416) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455458)

...when you pry HFS+ from my cold, dead hands.

No, wait. Give me that.

Is that gay??? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455701)

I feel more and more inclined to buy an Apple laptop. Is that gay?

I knew it (-1, Offtopic)

91degrees (207121) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455460)

Elvis IS alive

Elis is already reserved +1, Patriotic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455590)

Elvis [the-little...d-girl.org] is reserved for the vi [fu-berlin.de] clone.

Thanks in advance

Hmm... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455464)

As if Mac OS X isnt slow enough as it is now...

Hello you fagorts! (-1)

613746 (613746) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455467)

Why am I so cool? Is it my near perfect beaver or my 12" penis?

Tickle my ass with a feather.

w00t.

Glad to see new features for a change (1, Redundant)

jbarket (530468) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455472)

Seems like lately Apple has been hellbent on increasing performance and reintegrating features from 9. Not that I'm complaining, 10.2.1 runs like a dream on my TiBook. Glad to see things moving forward.

I am too, however... (4, Interesting)

BoomerSooner (308737) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455671)

If it takes a 10-15% performace hit that is significant on older hardware. 10.2 is faster than 10.1 but on a G3 333 it's still dog slow. It works out my G4 733 too.

That being said I'll try it but hopefully there will be a way to disable it as well.

Re:Glad to see new features for a change (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455688)

even amigaOs would run like a dream on a 5.000 bucks laptop ...

geesh

What about... (-1, Offtopic)

Quasar1999 (520073) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455476)

What about the promised all in one integrated, amazingly fast cross-referrence anything filesystem Microsoft promised us? Why isn't there a comparison to that???

What do you mean it's vapourware???

Re:What about... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455594)

Hello. You seem like the right person to ask. Would you lick my arse-hole clean? I just took a nasty shit and it is a real mess back there. I figured a fuckwit like yourself would enjoy tounging my stinky hole. Thanks! :)

Existing Journaling Systems? (5, Interesting)

aburnsio.com (213397) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455481)

Is this an entirely new journaling system or one based on an existing (BeOS) journaling system? Won't there be performance and stability impacts from basing it on HFS+ instead of a more modern framework? Is is possible to compile one of the existing *BSD journaling systems on OSX/Darwin (I haven't heard of anyone with success in this matter)?

Re:Existing Journaling Systems? (5, Informative)

StressedCoder (69160) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455614)

This seems like an entirely new system, because the BSD type systems do not have journaling, and there is no such system on the forseable horizon.

FreeBSD provides something called softupdates, which do much to alievate the need for a journaling system. And it does this without the performance hit. When FreeBSD 5.0 comes out it will do something called snapshoting, which will bring even more stability (and background fsck) without much of a performance hit. NetBSD provides (I think) a different implementation of softupdates. OpenBSD might too, I don't know.

Which makes me very disappointed that apple chose this route. Softupdates+Snapshots solves the problem without the performance hit. BSD doesn't need no stinking journaling.

Re:Existing Journaling Systems? (3)

h0tblack (575548) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455692)

Difficult to say that anything is totally new, I suspect this is 'new' but it will no doubt be influenced by previous work on BeOS, other filesystems the engineer has worked on, and other filesystems in general.
I suspect the advantage of having it based on HFS+ is at least partly to do with compatibility. At the moment you can install OS X on a UFS partition, but some apps won't play nice. Hopefully 'Elvis' will get around this problem and give users more options.

a bit offtopic, but (5, Interesting)

comp.sci (557773) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455484)

what other important features has OSX that Linux has not. I am thinking about getting a Laptop with OSX so I was wondering how OXS compares to Linux.

Re:a bit offtopic, but (5, Informative)

jbarket (530468) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455506)

I made the switch over last December. Love it. I was really more of a FreeBSD user, but you get the idea. It's wonderful to be able to have an attractive GUI with all too many bells and whistles to work with, but still be able to throw up a terminal window with bash and work with the real heart of things if you feel the need. Plus the ability to run XFree86 rootless on top of the GUI is nice.

Re:a bit offtopic, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455522)

Linux has a journaling FS. Redhat installs one by default.

Re:a bit offtopic, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455596)

Linux has a journaling FS. Redhat installs one by default. are you serious? Can anyone confirm this?

Re:a bit offtopic, but (5, Insightful)

papasui (567265) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455543)

A beautiful interface with great professional products available (photoshop, office, etc.) while keeping the ability to run nix software.

Re:a bit offtopic, but (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455707)

OSX will make you a flaming homo, while Linux will just make you a grungy,stinking, bearded fag. Either way, you take cocks up the poop-hole and enjoy sex with other men. With Solaris, I have gotten more hot pussy on accident then the whole MS community has or ever will. Oh, and BeOS? Goat feltchers/animal molesters, pure and simple. BSD users have no sexual orientation since they lack genitals or any sort; they breed via cell-division, like amoeba.

I hoped this helped you in your choice.

Cool! (-1, Offtopic)

Psychic Burrito (611532) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455486)

No... must resist...

Can't help falling in love :-)

CmdrTaco Logic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455489)

CmdrTaco: "I use it, so you should use it"

/.'ers: "Yes God"

Re:CmdrTaco Logic (0, Offtopic)

CommieBozo (617132) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455504)

How does him saying he's impressed with OS X translate into that?

die (-1)

cmdr_shithead (527909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455492)

equals you is suck apple goat? poo!

10 - 15% ?! (0, Flamebait)

GoatPigSheep (525460) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455493)

Though it will cost you 10% to 15% performance penalty

this could be a problem, seeing as macs have been seriously underperforming compared to PC's lately already. OS X tends to need a fast g4 just to run properly anyway, I guesse this file system will just push the requirements for OS X even higher :(

Re:10 - 15% ?! (5, Insightful)

Gannoc (210256) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455527)

Though it will cost you 10% to 15% performance penalty

This refers to hard disk access time penalties, not an overall 10-15% reduction in the performance of your computer. You wouldn't notice the difference.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455651)

Won't notice a difference? You must be crazy. The hard drive is the bottleneck of modern PCs. Making them slower slows the computer down noticeably, or at least to anyone who actually would *use* their computer.

Swap performance (2)

yerricde (125198) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455712)

This refers to hard disk access time penalties, not an overall 10-15% reduction in the performance of your computer.

When I bought my Acer notebook computer in 1999, I could afford only 64 MB of RAM. I have since upgraded it to 128 MB. A 10-15% reduction in swap file throughput will noticeably decrease the performance of my computer, especially with the slow 3600 RPM drives they put in laptops to keep the power drain down.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (1)

jbarket (530468) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455531)

As long as Apple keeps releasing things like Quartz Extreme and system updates to increase performance, I'm not too worried about sacrificing a little for JFS.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (4, Informative)

MaxVlast (103795) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455534)

Pish. I have a Pismo (500MHz G3 PowerBook) and a 933 G4. While the G4 is a lot faster, the Pismo is a delight to use and leaves me with no complaints.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (5, Insightful)

Faggot (614416) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455551)

I predict that it will become faster with time.

Just looking at how OS X itself has progressed in speed from Public Beta (slug with brick tied to it), to 10.0 (slug), to 10.1 (average lazy human), to 10.2 (average lazy human drinking strong coffee), I expect that by 10.3 this technology will not give nearly such a performance hit.

And heck. Don't like the speed hit? Turn it off.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (1)

jazman_777 (44742) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455689)

I predict that it will become faster with time.

Yeah, things seem to move quicker around me as I get older. When you're young, the days are short and the years are long. When you're old, the days are long and the years are short. It _is_ Fall, I am feeling a bit melancholic...

Re:10 - 15% ?! (5, Informative)

Lewisham (239493) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455556)

OS X doesn't really need a fast G4, any G4 is good as long as you have a shedload of RAM. That's the real OS X bottleneck, which is easily solved by a quick trip to Crucial.com.

I THINK YOU MEANT "SHITLOAD" (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455581)

AGREED, HE CERTAINLY MEANT "SHITLOAD" (0, Offtopic)

suffocate (90016) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455672)

I really like the letter 'z'

Re:10 - 15% ?! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455557)

Uh where do you see macs underperforming PC's lately? Give me some hard numbers please. The fact that the cpu speeds are slower doesnt mean squat. Give me real time performance figures between state of the art desktops from each camp and show me where and when the PC seriously outperforms a new mac.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (2)

ealar dlanvuli (523604) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455582)

Actually this will only effect the Hard disk access, which is exactly on par with every other desktop hard disk access. This would be equiv to upgrading to NTFS from Fat32's performance hit (Ie unless you run a file oriented database you wouldn't be able to tell)

The only place Apple currently lags is in the CPU, we all hope the Power4 will fix that, but it is true at present. Every other component is just fine, thats why offloading the UI rendering to the GPU caused such a dramatic speedup.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (1)

Master Bait (115103) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455586)

Considering the several available opensourced journaling filesystems that don't incur performance penalties, I have to laugh at Apple's latest lock-box attempt.

Re:10 - 15% ?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455639)

I'm willing to bet they aern't as robust as apples by any means. When the specs are out we shall find out.

Since your a troll I won't continue this post anyway.

CAN I GET A WOO HOO!!!!?? (-1, Redundant)

Genady (27988) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455497)

About fscking time. Wait, strike that.

even more performace hit (0, Flamebait)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455503)

I love OSX, woudl kill for an apple, but...
given how sluggish the OS is now, i wonder what it it would be like with a 10-15% hit...
what woudl i use jouranlised fs for anyway?

Re:even more performace hit (2)

MaxVlast (103795) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455562)

I trust the speed hit is for FS operations.

And the second question is why it's off by default :-)

10-15% (4, Interesting)

SlamMan (221834) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455505)

Ok, so being I'm not the highest on there terminology totem pole, can somebody expain to me why journaling matters to me, and why its worth 10-15% of my system resources?

Re:10-15% (5, Informative)

toupsie (88295) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455536)

Ok, so being I'm not the highest on there terminology totem pole, can somebody expain to me why journaling matters to me, and why its worth 10-15% of my system resources?

So you can have fun yanking out the power plug of your computer while its doing a write operation without the unpleasant experience on reboot. Most people (as in AOL Grandmas) don't need it but for servers, its a must. This will help beef up Mac OS X Server against Linux.

Re:10-15% (2)

Bastian (66383) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455571)

Journalling filesystems don't suffer data loss when the computer loses power suddenly. That's probably the most salient advantage.

If you can afford a UPS and run an OS that doesn't crash or hang often, you can most likely survive without one.

Re:10-15% (5, Informative)

aburnsio.com (213397) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455575)

Journaling your filesystem allows you to maintain integrity through a system crash or power outage. This doesn't mean you'll have all the data in your files uncorrupted (a point often missed by many), but rather that your filesystem won't become corrupted (you won't lose your filesystem because of a crash). Modern filesystems like the more recent Linux etxfs and XFS and Windows NTFS support journaling. It's an essential part of keeping your computer crash-resistant.

There is a cost, however. Journaling filesystems are slower than non-journaling because all file metadata update operations have to be written to a transaction log. This makes journaling a poor choice for some high-volume filesystems in scientific computing or other arenas where performance is uttermost (games). In most cases, however, the performance penalty is worth the added integrity.

Note that journaling your filesystem only keeps the metadata intact, not the file data itself. You can still loose data, such as the contents of a document you were editing but had not saved. For full transactional integrity you need the cost and overhead of a transactional database (SQLServer, Postgres, DB2, Oracle, etc.).

Re:10-15% (2, Insightful)

Ari Rahikkala (608969) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455704)

Actually, at least ext3 can do full data journaling (there's a mount option for that, but I've forgotten what it is). It's dog slow since all data needs to be written on disk twice, once to the file and once to the journal, but at least it keeps your data intact well. At first I thought that Elvis also used full data journaling, since this quote implied it:
The current version of NTFS, the file system within Windows 2000 and XP, does not handle full- fledged journaling, sources said; change-journal logs note alterations to files but don't provide enough information to reverse them.
However, AFAIK full data journaling should cause a 50% performance drop (unless the journal copies aren't written when the data proper is written - I don't actually know how this is handled, I wish free karma to the one who explains what those kjournald processes on my system actually are doing every five seconds) so Elvis probably only does metadata... or then I just don't know enough about journaling filesystems.

Re:10-15% (5, Informative)

rgmoore (133276) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455587)

Journaling means that if your system isn't shut down cleanly, it won't take forever to fsck your disk the next time you start up. The journal will contain all the information the system needs to get the system into a consistent state after an unclean shutdown. In addition, if the system journals all data instead of just metadata (as most journaling systems seem to do) it will prevent data loss, too.

Also bear in mind that it won't cost you 10-15% of your system resources; it will slow down disk operations by 10-15%, which is a much smaller penalty. If you aren't doing really disk intensive stuff, you probably won't even notice the slowdown. If you are doing lots of disk intensive activities, you'll probably like the fact that you're less likely to be hosed if your system crashes in the middle of one.

Re:10-15% (5, Informative)

TheMatt (541854) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455627)

If you have ever had a Linux system running a non-journaling filesystem, you'd know. I had a box using ext2, a non-journaling fs, go down in a power failure. This baby had about 100 GB of space in ext2. It took at least an hour to get the system up because if a box crashes without journaling, it must check the drives for consistency.

In comparison, that same box using ext3, a journaling filesystem, takes a second or two to recover since it is not dependant on the size of the drives, but the (small) size of the journal (except if your drive hardware fails).

Also, journaling helps with data integrity in cases of failure as well, so you don't get files filled with garbage at the end.

If they are using anything close to BeOS's filesystem, use it. That was by far the best filesystem I have ever seen. Beautiful.

Re:10-15% (1)

WankersRevenge (452399) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455699)

First off, thank you for asking this question. Some of my frustrations with Slashdot is that some of "obvious questions" can result in a good old fashioned hosing, so I commend your bravery where my mine so clearly faltered.

Now, my appendment to the question is this - we're getting two highly moderated threads with each one contradicting one another:

aburnsio.com writes "Note that journaling your filesystem only keeps the metadata intact, not the file data itself. You can still loose data, such as the contents of a document you were editing but had not saved."

whereas rgmoore writes "In addition, if the system journals all data instead of just metadata (as most journaling systems seem to do) it will prevent data loss, too."

So my question to the community - not the authors - which one of the two are correct?

The more I read/hear... (5, Interesting)

HogGeek (456673) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455507)

the more I really want a Mac. I've run VAXen, and UNIX based systems for about 15 years, and also use to run a small network of Macs, and I learned then to hate them...

The OS was unforgiving with incompatable hardware, and there just was NO configuration.

But now, I'm dying to try it again.

Any one got a spare system sitting around that I could try for a week or two. :-)

O look at those cute penguins! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455629)

Looks as if ASP101 has been taken over by a bunch of cuddly tuxy penguins [asp101.com] . How sweet!

Re:The more I read/hear... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455693)


i've got some maXen boXen i'll trade for your VAXen if you fuXor my daXund.

Re:The more I read/hear... (1, Offtopic)

Triv (181010) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455703)

I actually do, but it depends on where you are. I've got a spare iMac DV400 (running Jaguar) you can mess with for a bit. If you like it you're welcome to buy it, CHEAP. (I need the desk space.)Reply/email if you're interested.

:)

Triv

Just another reason... (5, Interesting)

toupsie (88295) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455514)

...to Switch! [apple.com] This was about the last major gripe I had with Mac OS X. We already have an encrypted file system. However, no matter how I have abused my Macs in the past, I have never had filesystem corruption with HFS+. I constantly forget to unmount my iPod and yank it off the firewire cable. Mac OS X grips about the possibility of filesystem corruption but so far, so good. Others mileage may vary and I wouldn't do it during a write.

Re:Just another reason... (2)

agentZ (210674) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455591)

Are they going to put Elvis on the iPod? Would that make it even easier to use my iPod under Linux? (And wouldn't it be cool to have Elvis on Elivs?)

Re:Just another reason... (2)

toupsie (88295) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455640)

Are they going to put Elvis on the iPod? Would that make it even easier to use my iPod under Linux? (And wouldn't it be cool to have Elvis on Elivs?)

It sounds like its bolted on top of HFS+ so it should work on the iPod which is HFS+ for the Mac version. I think the Windows iPod runs FAT32 which should be easier to use on Linux. I have never had great luck with the HFS drivers in Linux having full compatibility with my Mac drives.

Re:Just another reason... (4, Informative)

aburnsio.com (213397) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455613)

You get away with it because you aren't banging hard at the filesystem while yanking away at your cables. Try fulling loading your system with data copies back and forth to your iPod and an external hard drive, open your Mac box, and then on full disk load pull all cables (including internal hard drive connection). Try this a few times and you may have more luck. ;-)

Re:Just another reason... (5, Insightful)

x136 (513282) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455630)

I have never had filesystem corruption with HFS+.
You haven't been trying hard enough. :)

Although I will say that I've only had it happen once and it was pretty much my fault (and it wasn't in OS X, either.). More than I can say for FAT16/FAT32.

Observations (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455517)

Slashdot's mechanisms to prevent abuse really really suck. My last comment was posted in a total of 11 seconds. It was witty, and brief. Slashcode insisted I wait another 9 seconds.

I posted it, and got moderated down twice. One of these moderations was "Overrated". How can it be overrated if it's already been modded down.

Metamoderation doesn't catch "overrated". There are no checks on using this.

NTFS was way ahead of its time (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455518)

And it's been around for a while, too. Thanks, but no thanks, I'll stick with NTFS.

The reason it's shipping as off by default is to avoid that fiasco caused by ReiserFS and friends.

Disk Space. (-1, Troll)

Trusty Penfold (615679) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455520)


I use FAT32.

The diskspace used by the journal file in NTFS and this new filesystem can be put to much better use.

Re:Disk Space. (5, Interesting)

Soko (17987) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455650)


I use FAT32.

The diskspace used by the journal file in NTFS and this new filesystem can be put to much better use.


Ya, like all of the fucking backups you need to keep your data safe. On that 80Gig disk, no less.

Fuck
All
There

is what we used to call the FAT filesystem, and for good reason. No security, no recovery. You work for Peter Norton, any chance? :-P~~~~~~~~~~~

Get a clue, bud - journaling file systems were integrated with _all_ modern OSes for a reason. Namely, big gain, near zero cost.

Soko

Re:Disk Space. (4, Informative)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455670)

"The diskspace used by the journal file in NTFS and this new filesystem can be put to much better use."

You mean like empty cluster tips?

NTFS might use a good amount of space, but you make up for allot of that just based on the smaller cluster sizes. Take a large directory (20,000+ files, 10GB+), put it on a Win2k machine with NTFS, then another with FAT32. Right click -> properties. Size on Disk says it all.

Focus Follows Mouse (-1, Offtopic)

sfritzd (181571) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455521)

Won't touch OS X until window focus can follow the mouse. Sorry.

Re:Focus Follows Mouse (2)

SlamMan (221834) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455561)

Since plenty of people hate that, I don't see that being a default. Ever.

Would be nice to have the option though.

Codetek VirtualDesktop has this feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455642)

it's in Beta 5 - has Focus Follows Mouse, also has multiple desktops (the only one that "really" works on OS X)

CodeTek is extremely responsive, and VirtualDesktop will be a musthave app when it is finished.

product info: http://www.codetek.com/php/virtual.php
direct d/l (full featured but limited to 2 virtual desktops) http://www.codetek.com/CodeTekVirtualDesktop.dmg.g z

Thisis 100% PURE rumor (5, Informative)

gsfprez (27403) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455524)

i wish it would have been explained that way...

the writer of the eWeek article is Nick De Plumme (or something) - he's the guy from ThinkSecret....

hardly a "journalistic" website.

Re:Thisis 100% PURE rumor (5, Informative)

jamesoutlaw (87295) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455598)


Remember a few months ago when several web publishers lost their Press Credentials to MacWorld for publishing Rumors? "Nick dePlume" was one of them. Matthew Rothenburg wrote an editorial entitled "Let My People Go" (or something like that) saying that these so-called "rumor" sites should be allowed the same privileges as the "real" press. Since then he's been co-writing articles every now and then with dePlume (that's a pen name, who knows that the guy's real name). I think that it's to try and lend some credibility to Think Secret and dePlume.

Of course, this is pure speculation and all. who knows. haha

Regardless of the truth, Rothenburg's "association" with Think Secret has basically caused me to lose respect for him.

Re:Thisis 100% PURE rumor (2, Insightful)

heychris (587825) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455687)

Well, this is purely IMHO, but eWeek and ThinkSecret seem to have a pretty good track record in predicting future Apple moves. I don't have any data to back that up, though...and I'm not inclined to go looking right now.

That being said, it's been pretty well known that Apple seems to be taking a shining to corporate America more in recent months. A journaling file system would go a long way. Not as long as RAID 5 support in the Xserve would, but it would help. Yes, I know of the XRaid, but that's not here yet (or even officially announced, as far as I can tell). One wonders what Sun thinks of all of this...

Apple seems to "get" the corporate world now. I've heard nothing but positive comments about Apple's Server support from clients. Under AppleShareIP, it was all but useless, but they seem to have a good mix of Unix and Mac folks manning the lines.

If only Open Directory and AD integration were not such a chore. If I wasn't working on MSCE material, I think I'd be lost with Apple's Open Directory. High-level training of any kind still seems to be difficult to come by, though I think the certifications are on the right track. Hopefully, MacOS X's appeal to the alpha geeks and *nix cross-over will help there.

CC

Re:Thisis 100% PURE rumor (5, Informative)

MatthewRothenberg (617484) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455709)

We made it very clear that we're working from sources, and that the release of this information has not been sanctioned.

Of course, I stand behind it completely, and I recommend that you check out our track record for accuracy when reporting unannounced Mac news on eWEEK: The end of Mac OS 9 booting and the rise of IBM's 64-bit PowerPC are just two recent examples of stories we nailed to the wall in advance of the official PR.

It's not my place to speak for Think Secret, but Mac stories we put on eWEEK adhere strictly to a three-source rule (and always make a point of offering Apple an opportunity to respond, not that the company often avails itself of the chance). While we'd never burn a source, we make it absolutely clear what's official writ and what's unreleased insider information. This falls into the latter camp, but that doesn't detract a bit from its authenticity.

Check back with me in a month, gsfprez, and we can talk about whether or not this story has legs. :-)

Matthew Rothenberg
Online editor
Ziff Davis Media

I want a BLOGGING Filesystem (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455526)

Wil Wheaton, please get coding ASAFP.

Re:I want a BLOGGING Filesystem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455607)

You pervert

Re:I want a BLOGGING Filesystem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455636)

You pervert

It's a living. Wanna shack up?

About that performance hit ... (5, Interesting)

benedict (9959) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455540)

I wonder if that stated 10-15% performance hit
is with or without journal on a separate disk.

I'm surprised no one has brought this up yet.

Re:About that performance hit ... (3, Insightful)

Bastian (66383) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455602)

Since about 90% of mac users won't ever put a second disk in, and there isn't even room in an iMac for a second disk that I know of, I'd imagine they are only talking about on a single disk.

more than just a pretty face (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455548)

At least this shows Apple's serious with courting the tech-savvy audience. Before, the reason to go with Apple was out of preference for the UI... and that was it. OS9 was ungainly and unstable. With OSX there're now true geeky reasons to want a Mac. No more being ashamed of coveting the rainbow apple! I want protected memory/journalling fs/unix multiuser/process stability/gnu tools/etc ... and an interface that looks like i can eat it for dessert!

Can this be rolled back into the BSDs? (3, Interesting)

Hairy_Potter (219096) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455552)

One of the main reasons I haven't switched from the despotic Linux family with it's Nazi-esque SysV init scripts is the presence of awesome journaling capability, knowing that I can pull out the power cords on my SCSI disks and reconstruct data on the fly gives me a lot of peace of mind.

But, having cut my eye teeth on SunOS 4.1.3, I still have a hankering for the old rc files, and the general Berkeleyness of the BSDs. Will Apple be good enough to help roll a decent journaling file system back into the BDSs, so I can return to my blissfil Berkely rc days, and not worry about the cleaning lady pulling out my RAID power outlet to use the vacuum cleaner?

Re:Can this be rolled back into the BSDs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455631)

The BSD's have soft-updates, which depending on who you ask, are as good or better than journaling.

Re:Can this be rolled back into the BSDs? (1)

StressedCoder (69160) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455641)

Read up on softupdates. BSD doesn't need journaling.

Re:Can this be rolled back into the BSDs? (3, Funny)

90XDoubleSide (522791) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455708)

This will probably have its source released as part of Darwin (simply because it's a low-level function; I don't have any news about this), but it will also probably only work on HFS+ filesystems, so someone else would still have to adapt it to other filesystems to add it to the other BSDs.

Which is better: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455554)

a) A journalling filesystem

OR...

b) Sex with a mare?

please post a picture of the mare (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455578)

or at least a link.

Re:please post a picture of the mare (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455635)

Will this [goatse.cx] do?

Obligatory Post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455572)

"I've been super impressed by OS X having used it as my primary laptop for the last couple weeks. It really is a great unix box- and this is one of the important missing puzzle pieces."

For the n'th time, OS X != UNIX!!!

Apple == Microsoft (0, Flamebait)

SubtleNuance (184325) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455595)

Meet your new boss, same as the old boss.

for all the users crying OSX rulez, dont forget the Freedom in GNU/Linux has a purpose - to avoid being owned by MS or Apple or Sun or many others who would enslave your computing lives.

remember that when you think about OSX.

The Parent is FLAMEBAIT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455674)

Apple is a lot of things, and Microsoft isn't one of them.

DARWIN IS OPEN-SOURCE
OS X gives such an Incredible amount of freedom. It can run any app, IN AQUA (with rootless XDarwin), with a simple recompile. With fink, no recompile needed.

I doubt if you've seriously used OS X

Note that Windows' core will never be open source if we all live to be 3000 years old.

Re:Apple == Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455690)

mod parent up

Re:Apple == Microsoft (1)

alexandre (53) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455696)

Apple is even worst, they control the hardware too! Just imagin apple and ms role reversed, it would be computer hell ... :-(

Case sensitive (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455599)

I'd rather have a plain old UFS filesystem that IS case sensitive than HFS+journaling+whatever.

Actually, I'd like to see XFS on mac. I guess it's one thing to take ideas from *BSD, but completely different from taking ideas from IRIX.

UFS + SoftUpdates? (0)

sinator (7980) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455616)

Doesn't the Apple_UFS have SoftUpdates compiled in? Doesn't ordered writes of metadata preserve filesystem integrity better, faster, and with less performance hit than journaling (which ideally requires its own platter?) Doesn't Apple already have this?

so when you unmount... (5, Funny)

Hooya (518216) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455624)

do you get an "Elvis has left the building" message?

System Error (5, Funny)

jbarket (530468) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455691)

Disk Read Failure: The King is dead.

But will it Blog? (5, Funny)

Gorm the DBA (581373) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455628)

yeah, yeah, yeah...Journaling is sooo 1990's.

A new and cool feature would be a file system that maintained a Weblog...

Today I stored my user's tax return...what a piece of crap...he actually expects the IRS to believe that he donated 40,000 to the MDA?...I think I'll just switch a few numbers around and drop a hint to the audit hotline

Yeah, that could be good...where's the SourceForge project for this?

READ, COMPREHEND, POST (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4455663)

I already made this joke earlier, mister. Make with the crying and pleading already.

Questions for CmdrTaco... (3, Interesting)

webslacker (15723) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455668)

Rob, what kind of laptop is it?

And will you be writing a review of OSX and Apple laptops in the near future?

Re:Questions for CmdrTaco... (2)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455700)

And will they all be favorable?

why not XFS? and... (2)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455683)

my questions:

1)XFS from SGI has been open source for awhile and seems to fit well with the Apple's recent high end purchases like Shake and Logic. Why reinvent the wheel?

2)Will this cause problems with binary applications? Because already stuff like Windows Media Player and Kensington Mouse Works won't run on UFS. Yeah, I know, it's the lazy programmers' fault, but still, it would be very annoying to reformat and find that Office won't work.

3)Has anyone been to the MPF and found out any more about the GPUL? Tell me now!

Apple's secret Switch plot (0, Flamebait)

theLunchLady (97107) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455694)

Inside the Apple meeting room: "If we can just find a way to buy off Taco the ./ community desktop will be our, Muahahhahahha"

-theLunchLady
---
not .sig is good .sig

w00t! (1)

boola-boola (586978) | more than 11 years ago | (#4455706)

This is one of those BIG features that I have been waiting for Apple to implement. I may well have to go buy a Mac now.

(I remember reading this [slashdot.org] back in the day, and I've been waiting for this day ever since =P )

...If only I could get a 64-bit PowerPC proc. with it, _now_

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>