4 ms·
> they abandoned POSIX compatibility, built a massively over-complicated product This is a wild sentence--how can you criticize them for abandoning POSIX suppo
by throwaway894345 11mo ago
> they abandoned POSIX compatibility, built a massively over-complicated product
This is a wild sentence--how can you criticize them for abandoning POSIX support __and__ building a massively over-complicated product? Making a reliable POSIX system is inherently very complex.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- bee_rider 11mo agoI think the criticism (just interpreting the post, don’t know anything about the technical situation) is that the complication is not necessary/worthwhile. POSIX can be complicated, but it puts you in a nice ecosystem, so for some use-cases complex POSIX support is not over complicated. It is just… appropriately complicated.
- throwaway894345 11mo agoSure, but then you can make that argument about any of the features in Minio, in which case the parent's argument about Minio as a whole being overcomplicated is invalidated. Probably the more sensible way to look at things is "value / complexity" or "bang for buck", but even there I think POSIX loses since it's relatively little value for a relatively large amount of complexity.
- bee_rider 11mo agoYeah. I don’t actually know if they are right or wrong, it depends on the ecosystem the project wants to hook in to, right? I just want to reduce it from “wild” to “debatable,” haha.
- ahepp 11mo agoWhat would go in to POSIX compatibility for a product like this which would make it complicated? Because the kind of stuff that stands out to me is the use of Linux specific syscalls like epoll/io_uring vs trad POSIX stuff like poll. That doesn't seem too complicated?