Re: The argument for fs assistance in handling archives

Hans Reiser
2004-09-02T08:58:41Z

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> But _my_ point is, no user program is going to take _advantage_ of
>
>anything that only one filesystem on one system offers.
>
>
Apple does not have this problem....

and yes, the apps will take advantage of it, which is different from
depending on it. If you use the wrong fs you will lose some of the
features of the app.

For 30 years nothing much has happened in Unix filesystem semantics
because of sheer cowardice (excepting Clearcase, which priced itself
into a niche market). It is 25 years past time for someone to change
things. That someone will have first mover advantage, and the more
little semantic features possessed the more lure there will be to use it
which will increase market share which will lure more apps into
depending on it and in a few years the other filesystems will
(deservedly) have only a small market share because the apps won't all
work on them.

Besides, there are enhancements which are simply compelling. You can
write a dramatically better performance version control system with a
much simpler design if the FS is atomic. Our transaction manager
first draft was written by a version control guy, and he would probably
be happy to tell you how lack of atomicity other than rename makes
version control software design hideous.

We have the performance lead. By next year we will be stable enough for
mission critical servers, and then we start the serious semantic
enhancements.

If you don't embrace progress, then you doom Linux to following behind,
because the guys at Apple are pretty aggressive now that Jobs is back,
and they WILL change the semantics, and they will do so in compelling
ways, and Linux will be reduced to aping them when it should be leading
them.

Hans