Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Oct 2009 21:13 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Mac OS X John Siracusa, the Mac OS X guru who writes those insanely detailed and well-written Mac OS X reviews for Ars Technica, once told a story about the evolution of the HFS+ file system in Mac OS X - he said it was a struggle between the Mac guys who wanted the features found in BeOS' BFS, and the NEXT guys who didn't really like these features. In the end, the Mac guys won, and over the course of six years, Mac OS X reached feature parity - and a little more - with the BeOS (at the FS level).
Thread beginning with comment 391017
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Not surprising
by phoenix on Sun 25th Oct 2009 21:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Not surprising"
phoenix
Member since:
2005-07-11

"While ZFS is great, its advantages are targetted mainly to servers, from the user POV it's just POSIX + snapshots/volume management. It doesn't brings new things to the desktop

How about "no more filesystem checking"?
There is no fsck for ZFS. End to end checksumming does it all.
"

There is no separate, offline fsck. But there still is the online, background "fsck" known as scrubbing. And it's recommended that you do that at least once a month.

Reply Parent Score: 2