Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 14th Oct 2007 14:52 UTC, submitted by Oliver
Matthew Dillon writes: "I am going to start committing bits and pieces of the HAMMER filesystem over the next two months. Note that the filesystem will not be operational until we get closer to the 2.0 release in December so these bits and pieces will not be tied into buildworld/buildkernel until then." Features: maximum size of half an exabyte, infinite snapshots, limited only by retention policy, streaming backups, asynchronous transactional support (no long fscks to check disk state). Dillon also explains why he chose not to use Sun's ZFS.
Thread beginning with comment 278161
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2006-05-26
The concern for backwards compatibility is a huge reason for Vista taking as long as it did, making as many changes as it did: this filesystem only needs to be sufficiently compatible with the virtual file system interface, and implement according to that general contract: in no way can Vista and any single filesystem be comparable in scope, complexity, or manpower required to do things correctly. You might as well foolishly start comparing the development of this filesystem (or any other filesystem) that needs to have the VFS compatibility with say, KDE going between one major revision number and another, as that is a similar comparison to what you're making.
Nonetheless, there's often a great advantage to being only a single person in charge of a system, and also a disadvantage: a single person won't (hopefully) end up creating something that reeks of "design by committee" but by the same token, it's entirely possible that a single developer will have one or more huge blindspots that causes them to miss something needed or mess up in some spectacular way that'd be prevented by having more than one person involved.