3 ms·

Yes it really cannot emphasized enough that the legacy filesystem system interface with it's too-simple 1970s origin and then far, far, far too complex decades

Yes it really cannot emphasized enough that the legacy filesystem system interface with it's too-simple 1970s origin and then far, far, far too complex decades of duck tape is a disasterous albatros. C.f. What linus is saying in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21673372 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21673372 except turn it around. When an interface has devolved into two sides hating and Postel's-law-enabling each other ad infinitum, and a statement like his is actually justifiable, it's time to close up shop and move on. Nothing good will ever come from POSIX-like storage ever again, and any storage system built around it is doomed to be a mess of too many layers and also too many layer violations. Utter hopelessness.

bsder 7y ago
> Yes it really cannot emphasized enough that the legacy filesystem system interface with it's too-simple 1970s origin and then far, far, far too complex decades of duck tape is a disasterous albatros. Except that nobody will sign on. Look at what happened to FreeBSD in the 5.0 timeframe when they reworked their storage layers into GEOM. It was a NIGHTMARE. Most people agreed it needed to be done, but there was an excruciatingly loud segment who complained incessantly. It took some gigantic brass balls and asbestos-lined flamesuits on the part of FreeBSD heavy hitters to drive it through. If the system in Linux is to get fixed, Linus would probably have to step in and pronounce.
- mpweiher 7y ago
  Maybe the OS is not the right layer for this?
  - mbreese 7y ago
    What other layer could it be in? (Legitimately curious)
    - valenciarose 7y ago
      In userland, for one. Or an unprivileged service in a microkernel O/S. There are a lot of concerns jammed into the current concept of filesystem.
user5994461 7y ago
Do you have an opinion on whether filesystem in Windows is a comparable mess?
- Ericson2314 7y ago
  I don't, but I imagine it is no better. The VMS NT people had good intentions but both ecosystems are smothered in backwards compatibility and Postel's law issues.

bsder 7y ago

> Yes it really cannot emphasized enough that the legacy filesystem system interface with it's too-simple 1970s origin and then far, far, far too complex decades of duck tape is a disasterous albatros. Except that nobody will sign on. Look at what happened to FreeBSD in the 5.0 timeframe when they reworked their storage layers into GEOM. It was a NIGHTMARE. Most people agreed it needed to be done, but there was an excruciatingly loud segment who complained incessantly. It took some gigantic brass balls and asbestos-lined flamesuits on the part of FreeBSD heavy hitters to drive it through. If the system in Linux is to get fixed, Linus would probably have to step in and pronounce.

mpweiher 7y ago
Maybe the OS is not the right layer for this?
- mbreese 7y ago
  What other layer could it be in? (Legitimately curious)
  - valenciarose 7y ago
    In userland, for one. Or an unprivileged service in a microkernel O/S. There are a lot of concerns jammed into the current concept of filesystem.

user5994461 7y ago

Do you have an opinion on whether filesystem in Windows is a comparable mess?

Ericson2314 7y ago
I don't, but I imagine it is no better. The VMS NT people had good intentions but both ecosystems are smothered in backwards compatibility and Postel's law issues.