Sorry, overlooked your question. First, I have not been actively involved in Fastly, apart from telling Artur to "go for it!" :-) With respect to Flash techno

Sorry, overlooked your question. First, I have not been actively involved in Fastly, apart from telling Artur to "go for it!" :-) With respect to Flash technology I have noted elsewhere in this discussion that today our SSD devices effectively contain a filesystem in order to pretend they are disks, and that stacking two filesystems on top of each other is ... suboptimal. But as I also just noted, flash isn't just flash, some properties are very hard to generalize, so i tend to think that we will have to let the people who decide what to solder onto the PCB provide at least the wear-levelling. If I were to design an OS today, I think I would stick firmly with the good ol' UNIX name-hierarchy model, but I would probably split the filesystem layer horizontally in a common and uniform "naming layer" serviced by per-mount "object stores". If you look at FreeBSD, you will see that UFS/FFS is sorta-split that way, but I would move the cut slightly and think in terms of other primitives which take SSD and networks better into account, but see also: Plan9. The service I would want from a SSD device is simply: A) Write object, tell me it's name when written. B) Read object named $bla C) Forget object named $bla Then I'll build my filesystem on top of that. (The NVME crew seems to be moving in the right direction, but it is my impression that some patents prevent them from DTRT, just like Sun's "Prestoserve" patent held up development.).