5 ms·

I think a big problem with metadata-aware “file systems” is that the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system. This is a problem with ID3 ta

I think a big problem with metadata-aware “file systems” is that the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system. This is a problem with ID3 tags for instance. Another problem is where you make the compromise in the no-mans land between fully fledged data structure and file system. As soon as you start adding meaningful metadata to the file system, it quickly becomes apparent that you want the files themselves to be structured data and not just opaque sequences of bytes. At that point you’re redesigning the OS since that mode of usage requires user and application buy-in. It’s just a tough design problem to make any universally applicable progress in this space and it seems like any sort of non-HFS system is destined for application specific use cases.

jstanley 9y ago
> the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system. This is a problem with ID3 tags for instance. Are you sure? ID3 tags are embedded in the file itself, and therefore remains in the file no matter what medium you store it on.
- friendlydude12 8y ago
  That’s my point.
tinix 9y ago
> the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system As someone who has implemented such a "file system" (or three) for various types of enterprise clients, some of which in turn serve it to other b2b clients of their own... I just have to say... this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and also, it's not necessarily true either. For starters, one can easily give every file a unique uuid, and map that uuid to a spreadsheet full of metadata. Additionally, a little vendor lock in to keep "special features" like management of a bespoke file system isn't necessarily a bad thing, either, if it's in your best interest to keep paying customers. Application specific use cases? Sure... but what isn't? You can build a generic abstract non-hierarchical file system though... easily.
Crontab 8y ago
"I think a big problem with metadata-aware “file systems” is that the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system." This is my thought as well. I used to run BeOS as my main OS, and when I finally had to move away from it, all the BeFS metadata was left behind as well.

jstanley 9y ago

> the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system. This is a problem with ID3 tags for instance. Are you sure? ID3 tags are embedded in the file itself, and therefore remains in the file no matter what medium you store it on.

friendlydude12 8y ago
That’s my point.

tinix 9y ago

> the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system As someone who has implemented such a "file system" (or three) for various types of enterprise clients, some of which in turn serve it to other b2b clients of their own... I just have to say... this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and also, it's not necessarily true either. For starters, one can easily give every file a unique uuid, and map that uuid to a spreadsheet full of metadata. Additionally, a little vendor lock in to keep "special features" like management of a bespoke file system isn't necessarily a bad thing, either, if it's in your best interest to keep paying customers. Application specific use cases? Sure... but what isn't? You can build a generic abstract non-hierarchical file system though... easily.

Crontab 8y ago

"I think a big problem with metadata-aware “file systems” is that the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system." This is my thought as well. I used to run BeOS as my main OS, and when I finally had to move away from it, all the BeFS metadata was left behind as well.