glennklockwood

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by glennklockwood 9y ago

   There are very few cases in practice where it's needed. The bigger issue is deciding what consistency semantics you _do_ want to have once you decide that strong isn't necessary. Every decision exposes another corner case where
2. 2.▲
   by glennklockwood 9y ago

   A more pedantic title would be "What's so bad about POSIX I/O for scalable performance on networked file systems". As others have said, it's an old problem that predates exascale by decades. I never asserted that
3. 3.▲
   by glennklockwood 9y ago

   The context was definitely HPC, but that's mostly because it's the last place where this problem persists in a very big way. The WORM workloads that serve up most of the data we consume globally just rejected POSIX entirely and c
4. 4.▲
   by glennklockwood 9y ago

   It is and people do use it, but it ultimately still exists as software that sits on top of POSIX in the vast majority of cases. It can clean up really bad POSIX I/O by buffering and reordering, but doing so induces latency, memory ove