From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 1 8:21:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C6914BFA for ; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:21:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA04291; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 17:19:38 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id RAA73394; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 17:19:37 +0100 (MET) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 17:19:36 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund To: Don Cc: Jacques Vidrine , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS Message-ID: <19991101171936.J72085@bitbox.follo.net> References: <19991030233304.03DB31DA4@bone.nectar.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from don@calis.blacksun.org on Sat, Oct 30, 1999 at 07:40:35PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Oct 30, 1999 at 07:40:35PM -0400, Don wrote: > This is getting off topic. What features would you like to see in a new > file system. Some suggestions were made. Would you like to add anything to > this list? Yes. * Easy to do concurrent access from multiple hosts to the same physical media * Ability to span more than one disk * Performance guarantees I have design papers on the FS designed for G2, which was intended to support all of the features I've seen listed so far. It has a couple of drawbacks: (1) It is not designed to have the semantics of a standard Unix filesystem. It is designed to run at the bottom end of a chain of stacked filesystems. If you want e.g. symlinks to work, you need to stack a layer. (2) It is not designed to run on a single spindle. Single spindle performance will be horrible. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message