4 ms·
File System Wars
- i_am_a_peasant 6mo agoIs there a reason in particular why btrfs is not part of this discussion? It's been mentioned once in passing.
- otterley 6mo agoA solid article, but missing discussion of XFS and Btrfs. I would have enjoyed the author’s analysis of the former in particular, especially as compared to ext4.
- sam_lowry_ 6mo agoAlso biased towards APFS which has quite some problems, e.g. unicode normalization hell.
- kjs3 6mo agoYeah...he even alludes to it in his APFS section: "hey I talked about all those other filesystems so I can talk about what I really want to talk about...how awesome I think APFS is".
- m-p-3 6mo agoI wouldn't mind seeing BcacheFS compared too, despite the current falling out between the main dev and Linus and its exclusion from the kernel (which will hopefully be a momentary thing).
- mmh0000 6mo agoThe author's praise of ZFS fell 3 checksums short of acceptable. ZFS is not a filesystem. It is a lifestyle. A covenant. A snapshot of the soul. Everything else is basically a USB stick with dreams. I will be reporting this to the [author]ities, HR, and my dad. /s for the /s impaired.
- isr 6mo agoDragonflyBSD's hammer filesystem (on v2 now, I think)
- troad 6mo ago> So, if I had to compress its philosophy into one sentence, it would be this: >> Simple, reliable, UNIX-native fundamentals — no feature bloat, just solid engineering. This isn't the author's summary. This is AI's. I was enjoying the article, but when a little AI shibboleth like this shows up, I just cease to trust what I'm reading. Edit: many more AI writing give-aways later in the article. What a shame.
- pseudohadamard 6mo agoDid anyone else giggle every time they read "FFS" in TFA?