<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/14745/Google_File_System_Exposed</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:46:31 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>The myth of the google operating system</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128825</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128825</guid>
			<description>It's getting old.  Give it some time, this'll be on snopes.<br />
<br />
Has anybody stopped to think that GFS is what google uses for their fantastic server farm and search engine?<br />
<br />
NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br />
<br />
Why did I insert common sense here?  I'm fired.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 18:33:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (halfmanhalfamazing)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: The myth of the google operating system</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128826</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128826</guid>
			<description>Why did you not read the article to see it wasn't speculation about a possibly GoogleOS at all, and instead described the distributed filesystem for their server farm?</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 18:34:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Ronald Vos)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Distributed file system</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128830</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128830</guid>
			<description>Isn't that the *cough* perfect type for a search engine?<br />
<br />
Yeah, there's more of that common sense.  I can't help it, really.<br />
<br />
But being as Google is so secretive, some idiot out there has to start speculating and inserting opinion.....  it's the lack of fact that opens the door for this.  It's the same thing as conspiracy theorists.<br />
<br />
All you have to do is read the feature list and it screams at you &quot;i'm used primarily for <a href="http://www.google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com</a> &quot;.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 18:38:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (halfmanhalfamazing)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>terrible article</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128833</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128833</guid>
			<description>'quick overview' doesn't even begin to describe how quickly this article was written: It's unstructured, the author seems to have mixed GoogleFS(1) with GmailFS(2) on the second page and it doesn't link to it's sources.<br />
<br />
All in all Google FS is a intresting filesystem, but if you are interested in it I advise you to just look at the PDF (3) and skip this article all together.<br />
<br />
1) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_File_System" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_File_System</a><br />
2) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GmailFS" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GmailFS</a><br />
3) <a href="http://labs.google.com/papers/gfs.html" rel="nofollow">http://labs.google.com/papers/gfs.html</a></description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 18:43:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (progster)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Poor article</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128837</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128837</guid>
			<description>I think the author it's a little out of it's league.<br />
<br />
Since when AFS = Amiga File System?<br />
AFS is a distributed file system developed by Carnegie Mellon University and it wasn't used in Amiga for sure...<br />
<br />
I also liked the part that GFS uses Gmail accounts for the storage medium and it's made in phyton...<br />
So is saying that google uses gmail accounts to store the information in it's servers? <br />
What google did when gmail didn't exist? Maybe they used hotmail...</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 18:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (ddrum)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Poor Article</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128847</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128847</guid>
			<description>As ddrum points out above, AFS is not Amiga File System.<br />
Quick googling would've shown the author that:<br />
<br />
AFS = Andrews File System</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 19:33:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (wacky)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Architecture</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128848</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128848</guid>
			<description>&quot;In our next article, we will look into its architecture and its overall structure.&quot; I really want to see this guys next article as no-one outside Google knows this...</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 19:35:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (digitaldisaster)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Architecture</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128855</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128855</guid>
			<description>... or maybe he just read the paper published by google. <a href="http://labs.google.com/papers/gfs-sosp2003.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://labs.google.com/papers/gfs-sosp2003.pdf</a></description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 20:23:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (quickie)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Poor Article</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128873</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128873</guid>
			<description>That's, &quot;Andrew File System&quot;,  no 's', project was named for one of the founders of Carnegie Mellon.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 21:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Sphinx)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Very poor</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128879</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128879</guid>
			<description>Stopped reading after this paragraph...<br />
<br />
&quot;This filesystem actually provides a mountable Linux filesystem and uses our GMail accounts as a storage medium. It is a Python application and uses the FUSE userland framework to provide the filesystem, and uses libgmail library to communicate with GMail.&quot;</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 21:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (jcinacio)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: terrible article</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128883</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128883</guid>
			<description>I know a kid who does this sort of thing alot - takes a class and/or reads an article, then thinks he is an expert in that area. <br />
<br />
It is bad enough to rehash already readily available information, its another to rehash it and make it worse with errors and misleading information.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 22:20:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (diginux)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: The myth of the google operating system</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128886</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128886</guid>
			<description>From the blurb quoted by Thom, taken from the first paragraph of the article, emphasis by me:<br />
<br />
&quot; Honestly, it didn't make any sense to me. Where would Google deploy this proprietary file system? Or is Google planning to have an operating system?&quot;<br />
<br />
As you can see, speculation about a GoogleOS is in the first paragraph... or did you not read the article? ;P</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 22:37:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Pseudo Cyborg)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>&amp;iquest;How can this crap reach osnews front page?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128910</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128910</guid>
			<description>Come on, really... don't the editors of osnews review the articles a little more than the title? Please, consider removing the link to this article, or I'll have to delete osnews.com from my bookmarks, and never visit it again for the rest of my life. I promise <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /> <br />
Serioulsy, I think the level quality of the articles linked by osnews is not always the best, but this has lowered the barrier to the ground.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:19:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (prkprk)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>This must be a joke!</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128914</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128914</guid>
			<description>Amiga FS? Confusing GFS with the GmailFS hack? And people does not notice this? Damned...</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:43:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (fornwall)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>A direct link to sources would be more interesting</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128915</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128915</guid>
			<description>I agree - Y must we have this rubbish on OSnews - speculative crap IMO .<br />
<br />
How about that poor dolphin when the DB is down ?<br />
Maybe OSnews is against dolphins &amp; we should alarm WWF (not wrestling BTW) cause of cruelty to Flipper ? <img src="/images/emo/grin.gif" alt=";)" />  <br />
<br />
Ehhh ... am I the only one who took it for granted that Google has their own filesystem to deal with &quot;the world's data&quot; or knowledge or whatever - wasnt this already common knowledge &amp; sense ?<br />
<br />
Do we really need a &quot;news&quot; item every time random idiot on net with access to blog has an enlightenment &amp; thinks there will definatly be a Google OS when s/he think so - ?<br />
<br />
He simply rephrased &amp; also didnt - simply copy+paste from the wording what he found &amp; hasnt in the slightest explained why he mentions a Google OS at all - I guess he just felt it or what ?<br />
<br />
I just feel like blowing up teddy bears - ooops - somebody read that ?<br />
<br />
How about a tab at the top of OSn for crappy news so that all that rubbish can be looked at at will not &quot;force&quot; .<br />
<br />
Is it possible to suggest news stories ?<br />
<br />
How about voting for articles at least so that crap can be hidden quickly ?Edited 2006-05-30 00:57</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (poohgee)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Now I am curious about the 'Google Files System'</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128944</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128944</guid>
			<description>Dear osnews, can we have added an opposite to the 'Recommend' button please?  Maybe a 'superficial' or 'innacurate' buttons or something...?<br />
<br />
It is indeed a quick overview, so quick that mistakes are made and its misleading, in addition to being superficial.  This certainly shouldn't have made it onto osnews.com<br />
<br />
But all the best to the author to try better next time, you gotta starts somewhere, and there is always room for improvement.  Most of the comments are not at the author but at it surprisingly being posted on osnews.com.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 05:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (nii_)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>all speculation</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128945</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128945</guid>
			<description>I heard that google has a file system called FSFAT. If you think Sun's ZFS is amazing wait until google releases the source and binary for FSFAT. <br />
<br />
FSFAT=File System For A Toilet. It weighs the amount of fecal and urine samples for you to analyze.<br />
<br />
...let me just post the &quot;article&quot; to osweekly.comEdited 2006-05-30 06:00</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 06:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (djames)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Nothing to see here</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128946</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128946</guid>
			<description>Just another substandard and uninformed osweekly article that for some inexplicable reason got linked from osnews.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 06:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>I finally had to register OSNews</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?128982</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?128982</guid>
			<description>...just to point out that I have to remove it from my list of sites which I visit daily.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 10:23:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (telebleu)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Misinformation over and again</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?129006</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?129006</guid>
			<description>Though the guy may have 'good' intentions about informing OSNews's community. I think he failed... I do not look forward at the sequel of that article.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 12:42:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (shadow_x99)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Article Summary</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?129095</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?129095</guid>
			<description>I will provide you a very good summary of the &quot;article&quot; in two sentences:<br />
<br />
Google uses an internally developed distributed file system to store data necessary to provide services such as web search that require fast access to very large data sets. Unfortunately since I don't know how to read properly (much less anything about filesystems) please do not rely on my article as a factual source of any information whatsoever.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 17:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (gork)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Leave the author!</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?129108</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?129108</guid>
			<description>Guys isnt it too much? I mean if you know this much about OS, why dont u ppl start writing? I agree that the author  has committed a lot of mistakes but anyways screwing him this bad isnt fair. <br />
For example: take GNU/Linux controversy article on osweekly. I cant see a reasonm as why some stupid above find that article sub standard. Give me a break.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 17:53:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (SatyamevJayate)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Leave the author!</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?129129</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?129129</guid>
			<description>Its not about him - its about the fact that this is linked to on OSnews - this guy can post whatever he wants to - I dont care - but Im against rubbish being linked to on OSnews .<br />
<br />
&amp; yes this certainly is not the first time rubbish has been linked.<br />
<br />
@Thom : Not trying to directly insult you - but <img src="/images/emo/wink.gif" alt=";)" />  - is there a way we can influence the OSnews content ?<br />
<br />
Modding articles up &amp; down .. etc .. ?</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 18:50:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (poohgee)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Engineering curriculum</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?129302</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?129302</guid>
			<description>Hey, the guy has an &quot;Engineering curriculum&quot;, it must be enough to be linked on osnews...</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2006 10:23:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Lamego)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Engineering curriculum</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?129390</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?129390</guid>
			<description>Was that sarcastic?</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2006 19:21:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (SatyamevJayate)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
