From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751477AbWFJKDj (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:03:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751475AbWFJKDj (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:03:39 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:29850 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750787AbWFJKDi (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Jun 2006 06:03:38 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:03:17 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Gerrit Huizenga Cc: Jeff Garzik , Matthew Frost , Alex Tomas , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , ext2-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3 Message-ID: <20060610100317.GC20526@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Gerrit Huizenga , Jeff Garzik , Matthew Frost , Alex Tomas , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , ext2-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org References: <4489C34B.1080806@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 12:39:19PM -0700, Gerrit Huizenga wrote: > > PRECISELY. So you should stop modifying a filesystem whose design is > > admittedly _not_ modern! > > So just how long do you think it would take to get a modern filesystem > into the hands of real users, supported by the distros? From community > building, through design, development, testing, delivery? JFS is pretty nice because it has many adavanced features but still is rather simple. XFS has even more cool features such as a WIP parallel fsck and is proven on the biggest filesystems on COS operating systems out there, but as a disadvantage is hugely complex so outsiders have a hard time getting into it. So shortem the option I'd recommend is to start supporting XFS more broadly, because it's the high end filesystem that's out there today and fill the needs people have in the next five or so years. For the time after that we need to think about something that can scale aswell and better while beeing simpler. Also we need to start thinking about a clustered filesystem more, it might or might not make sense to have a cluster filesystem also do the next generation local filesystem thing. I'd probably start designing such a next gen fs by taking jfs and revamping it completely. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:03:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20060610100317.GC20526@infradead.org> References: <4489C34B.1080806@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrew Morton , Matthew Frost , Jeff Garzik , ext2-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Alex Tomas Return-path: To: Gerrit Huizenga Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 12:39:19PM -0700, Gerrit Huizenga wrote: > > PRECISELY. So you should stop modifying a filesystem whose design is > > admittedly _not_ modern! > > So just how long do you think it would take to get a modern filesystem > into the hands of real users, supported by the distros? From community > building, through design, development, testing, delivery? JFS is pretty nice because it has many adavanced features but still is rather simple. XFS has even more cool features such as a WIP parallel fsck and is proven on the biggest filesystems on COS operating systems out there, but as a disadvantage is hugely complex so outsiders have a hard time getting into it. So shortem the option I'd recommend is to start supporting XFS more broadly, because it's the high end filesystem that's out there today and fill the needs people have in the next five or so years. For the time after that we need to think about something that can scale aswell and better while beeing simpler. Also we need to start thinking about a clustered filesystem more, it might or might not make sense to have a cluster filesystem also do the next generation local filesystem thing. I'd probably start designing such a next gen fs by taking jfs and revamping it completely.