Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 24th Feb 2007 21:25 UTC, submitted by mdoverkil
BSD and Darwin derivatives Apparently, Matt Dillion has decided to roll his own filesystem for DragonFly. "Here is my initial outline of the filesystem design. It is open for discussion. Please feel to ask questions for anything you do not understand. I do not intend to start coding anything for at least two weeks. There are currently two rough spots in the design. First, how to handle segment overflows in a multi-master environment. Such overflows can occur when the individual masters or slaves have different historical data retention policies. Second, where to store the regeneratable indexes."
Thread beginning with comment 216211
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Why?
by Alwin on Sat 24th Feb 2007 22:13 UTC
Alwin
Member since:
2005-07-17

This is too silly for words... I mean, it is well known that the real limitation in OSS projects is the available amount of menpower (number of people that have the skills to do the job, and time to work on it).

And this guy is a driving force behind rewriting the core of an operating system. Work that requires experience, insight (foresight, if you will), and in general: solid coding skills. There are very few people that can do what this guy can, AND have the time/desire to work on this particular project.

And then, instead of focussing on the groundwork, this guy says: "I need a new filesystem!".

Helloooo! There are so many to choose from... Most of them decently engineered, debugged and mature. What does he *really* need that *no* existing filesystem provides? If so, why not pick what comes closest, and add [desired feature] to it?

Come on Matt, don't get sidetracked, don't waste your time on stuff that can be done later, or by others. Don't you want DragonFly to be a solid OS first, before spending time on [desired feature #xyz] ?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Why?
by galvanash on Sat 24th Feb 2007 22:28 in reply to "Why?"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Ill be honest up front... I have never used Dragonfly nor do I have any intention to at the moment, but I have been interested enough in it to read up on its status now and again. And I find your remarks somewhat puzzling.

Dragonfly started in 2003 (4 years ago). The goal was to (a) take FreeBSD and implement what the developers felt was a more sensible approach to SMP support with the purpose of laying the foundation for... (b) native clustering. That has been the stated goal since day 1.

(a) is pretty much done now, and (b) is more or less dependent on a new file system according to everything I have read about their clustering approach. How you think this is getting sidetracked I don't quite follow...

Edited 2007-02-24 22:40

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Why?
by rayiner on Sat 24th Feb 2007 22:42 in reply to "Why?"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

DragonFly has a very specific set of goals, which include high scalability and transparent clustering. From the feature set of the filesystem, it's clear that its desigened specifically to meet these goals. Read the specs for yourself, it's a very different best. It doesn't look like any filesystem I've encountered, and certainly not like {JFS, XFS, ZFS, BFS, HFS+, NTFS, EXT3/4, REISER4, UFS2}, which would be the main alternative mature and proven choices.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Why?
by twenex on Tue 27th Feb 2007 04:40 in reply to "Why?"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

This is too silly for words... I mean, it is well known that the real limitation in OSS projects is the available amount of menpower (number of people that have the skills to do the job, and time to work on it).

And how is that not "a real limitation" in non-OSS projects?

In fact I'd say that the really successful OSS projects make more progress than the really successful closed-source projects.

And then, instead of focussing on the groundwork, this guy says: "I need a new filesystem!".

In what way are filesystems "not groundwork"? If you develop an OS w/o a filesystem, what are you going to store your data on - a cheese sandwich?

Reply Parent Score: 2