hfs+ bears the marks of some decisions that made sense in the eighties, when macos was barely capable of running a single program at a time, but are limiting to

hfs+ bears the marks of some decisions that made sense in the eighties, when macos was barely capable of running a single program at a time, but are limiting today. pretty much everything requires locking the volume catalog, which makes disk access almost single-threaded. add to this the fact that apple is not afraid to throw out old stuff and bring in new -- they chucked the entire operating system nine years ago -- and the fact that they are still using hfs+ seems very strange indeed. the only thing i can figure is that they were grooming zfs as a successor, but it was taking longer than expected. now i guess they have to go back to the drawing board and think of something else.