You're not wrong. Interview from 2004 [0]: "DragonFly split off from FreeBSD-5 over major architectural differences, not anything else. We really do feel that F

You're not wrong. Interview from 2004 [0]: "DragonFly split off from FreeBSD-5 over major architectural differences, not anything else. We really do feel that FreeBSD-5 is taking the wrong approach to SMP and building something that is so complex that it will ultimately not be maintainable. We think we have a better way." But their original architectural decisions were done with this goal in mind [1]: "The ultimate goal of the DragonFly project at its inception was to provide native clustering support in the kernel. This type of functionality requires a sophisticated cache management framework for filesystem namespaces, file spaces and VM spaces." It's not difficult to see how HAMMER came to be three to four years later, given their stated design goals. [0] http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2004/07/08/dragonfly_bsd_interview.html http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2004/07/08/dragonfly_bsd_int... [1] https://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/ https://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/