3 ms·
Abstraction has a cost, and there are no guarantees that if implemented, the resulting performance would be considered acceptable. (It's even possible that many
by BlueTemplar 6y ago
Abstraction has a cost, and there are no guarantees that if implemented, the resulting performance would be considered acceptable. (It's even possible that many have already tried, and failed.) Of course this doesn't mean that we shouldn't try again and again. But we also have to realize that even if we're successful, this doesn't mean that the solution won't be left completely forgotten, as long as 'good enough' systems exist. (See the other threads for examples.)
- josephg 6y agoThats fine. Disks are so fast now that I would trade away 50% of the filesystem's performance for correctness in 95% of the software I use. (Eg my code editor, git, compiler, etc). Except I bet in a good implementation the actual performance cost of transactions would be negligible anyway. Especially on top of something like ZFS. And legacy software can just keep using the current unreliable APIs with all the performance that entails anyway.