3 ms·
> I don't see what your point is; You compared "local filesystem" to performance of S3. But you have no idea what are you comparing to what. Both are undefine
by crabbone 3y ago
> I don't see what your point is;
You compared "local filesystem" to performance of S3. But you have no idea what are you comparing to what. Both are undefined because neither you nor anyone reading what you wrote can know what you are measuring.
Like I said, there's no such thing as "local filesystem". You invented / repeated this term after someone who invented it on a spot. You / them didn't have a coherent explanation to what it means. Now nobody can understand what is that you are trying to say.
In essence, you are counting angels on the tip of a needle.
Also, this is not about block devices. Filesystems are programs. A lot of them are distributed programs. They run on many computers at once. I'll repeat the example I gave earlier with NFS: it's a distributed system, it has a server and a client. Both of them are the filesystem. But you cannot say that it runs "locally" or "remotely" because it's both or neither, or whichever one you choose... i.e. it's a worthless definition.
- dekhn 3y agoI don't know where you are coming from; everything I'm saying is entirely consistent with how the industry (I work in IT and "local filesystem" and "remote filesystem" are terms we all use, including with our storage vendors) talks about storage. Here's an example paper comparing filesystems and their performance for precisely this kind of problem: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-021-01326-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-021-01326-w figure 1A, B I work in this field and the figure text makes perfect sense to me and all my coworkers.