digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

From BFS to ZFS: past, present, and future of file systems

arstechnica.com — From the mainframe to the Mac mini and from BFS to ZFS, Ars explores the past, present, and future of file systems.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • p3ngwin, on 03/17/2008, -1/+60Beautiful write-up of a brief history of modern computing with information written in an interesting and humorous way that keeps you reading to the end.
    • cledet, on 03/17/2008, -3/+5I completely agree. I found it to be a good article!
      • sdub86, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2If you agree with his comment, then you click the thumbs-up icon and move on. I know some people will tell me my post is even worse than yours, but this is an epidemic and it needs to stop. Why the ***** would you post "I agree"? This defeats the whole purpose of digging comments. How about instead of giving positive/negative diggs, let's all just click reply and type "I agree" or "I disagree"? Awesome! You fail.
    • JoshuaH, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1You should review stuff for a living.
    • oshu, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1For entertainment value, I totally agree. However from a technical stand point, the article is mediocre at best. It suffers from many omissions, inaccuracies, and gross over simplifications.

      While there is a lot detail and background on DOS, Mac, and especially Windows file systems, the coverage of unix/linux file systems is piss poor. Calling ext3 "essentially ext2 with journaling support added on" is very misleading.

      The author also fails to describe the different types of journaling employed by the various file systems. Not all journaling is created equal!
  • iddybiddy, on 03/17/2008, -0/+32Great read, not too geeky but still goes into some detail about the fundamental differences.

    I just love tech history articles that can be understood by non programmers. Well done Jeremy Reimer
  • tjansson60, on 03/17/2008, -1/+14What a great article. It is seldom I read tech articles from one end to another but this story was so good I couldn't resist.
  • derubermensch, on 03/17/2008, -0/+26Great article. Makes me want to see ZFS in action even more so
    • BrainInAJar, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4so go install solaris on a box. it's free.
    • Tenoq, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1ZFS seems to do exactly what Windows Home Server does (storage pool, file duplication/protection, etc). It's just a shame MS had to use their nasty, slow workarounds instead of a new FS. Don't get me wrong: I think WHS is very innovative in what it does and how it's been implemented - but it's still so ***** slow sometimes that you want to stab yourself in the face.
  • PTrick, on 03/17/2008, -1/+8I learned a bunch. Thanks Ars.
  • abshack, on 03/17/2008, -1/+19Ars succeeds at Tech News where others fail miserably. Thanks Ars.
  • Razed, on 03/17/2008, -1/+14Definitely a neato must read for any geek. It kinda makes me excited about ZFS.
  • Sean42, on 03/17/2008, -17/+16Oh boy, he derided something Apple.
    Prepare for the apple fanboy burial to commence.

    Sidenote: I was in an apple store the other day when I realized that their steeply overpriced products and their 'air' of superiority reminded me very much of being inside an Abercrombie and Fitch store. They should put up posters of their apple products on the wall next to black and white models with abs.
    • UKsHaDoW, on 03/17/2008, -0/+5He didn't like mac os, os x he seemed to like :)
    • mizike, on 03/17/2008, -6/+13an apple fanboy brigade does not exist on digg; it's just a delusion fostered by the linux zealot majority......to draw an analogy, mac fanboys are to digg as "teh terrorists" are to the US....a conveniently intangible group which can bear the blame for anything those in power don't like....

      /+1 for insane analogy
      • jabberwolf, on 03/17/2008, -4/+1You're response seems to certify that yes, Apple fans are most likely to believe in conspiracies.
    • alwilson, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1It's okay Sean, say how you really feel about Apple.
    • Sean42, on 03/17/2008, -3/+4Honestly, nothing personal against apple, I am annoyed at all types of fanboys. (MS,Wii,Sony,Linux,Scientology). I have just noticed that the apple fans have been especially caffeinated lately in their digging up/down of stuff.
      Carry on.
      • fribhey, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2the problem is that you are so anti apple fanboys that you didn't bother reading the article, if you had then you would have known it was about the good and bad of all file systems
      • jabberwolf, on 03/17/2008, -5/+4Apple fans most likely to : be in Scientology, believe in conspiracies, people thinking they are nerds when knowing very little about computers.
        • UKsHaDoW, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1I'm a computer sci student, i own a mac, hate scientology, not really bothered about conspiracies
      • Tenoq, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2Hilarious mental image of frantically-clicking caffeinated-Diggers.
        "Digg more damn you! *CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK*
  • schneidafunk, on 03/17/2008, -5/+10This is a good article. Anyone interested in testing out some of the differences between file systems, here's a simple example.

    On a windows machine, make a directory that's close to 255 characters... next try and put a file in that directory with a filename that will push the directory + filename past 255 characters. You'll get an error message and won't be able to put a file in there. Try in linux and presto it works.
    • mmischke, on 03/17/2008, -6/+1Why would you _want_ to exceed 255 characters? I can cause my car's engine to throw a rod if I go over the red line, but why would I? I've been a Windows developer/geek since before NT first shipped and the path size limit has never affected me. Besides, 255 chars is a Windows limit, not an NTFS limit. Oh, and Linux is a proper noun. Please at least capitalize it before crowning it a false king.
      • Tenoq, on 03/18/2008, -0/+3Err, it's actually quite common. Most people like to organise their files - and it's fairly easy to exceed 255 characters with a few nested directories (actually I think they're folders now, following the Apple nomenclature?). It still bugs me when I'm trying to copy an entire file system to a new HDD and I get "error: filename too long." when it actually means the path is too deep. :p
    • neko, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Hell, never mind that, try and make a filename with a ? in it.

      (cue "why would you want to?": plenty of MP3 song names have them.)
      • init100, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1That's because ? is a wildcard that represents one character, at least in DOS and the command prompt.
    • schneidafunk, on 03/18/2008, -0/+3Dear mmischke A.K.A. unnecessarily annoying *****,
      According to this website http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm NTFS has a 255 character limit. Also, why are you complaining about linux not being capitalized but not about windows? Regardless, my grammar & spelling doesn't affect the example I provided.
    • lovestospooge, on 03/18/2008, -0/+3That is a limitation of the XP operating system, not the NTFS file system.
    • casual7y, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1I;m using vista and it works fine for me...
  • diggB, on 03/17/2008, -0/+10Wow. ZFS really impressed me. Think we'll ever hit a ceiling with a 128-bit file system? Think again ...

    FTA

    Project leader Jeff Bonwick said that "Populating 128-bit file systems would exceed the quantum limits of earth-based storage. You couldn't fill a 128-bit storage pool without boiling the oceans." It would literally take a computer made of pure energy, emitting enough energy to bring the entire world's oceans to a boiling point, to fill up the limits of a 128-bit file system. It seems unlikely that anyone is going to build a 256-bit file system any time soon.
    • DarkDx, on 03/17/2008, -6/+25Chuck Norris uses a 512-bit filesystem in his computer.
      • Ratteler, on 03/17/2008, -4/+7I laughed. I dugg you up. You're a moron... but I still laughed.
        • Scaryclouds, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1And Chris Cooper has a 612 bit encrypted program written entirely in binary that is completely unbreakable.
    • maz2331, on 03/18/2008, -3/+1And... 640 kB is more than enough for anyone.
  • skmice2, on 03/17/2008, -0/+11Normally I would rate an article like this as 'too long didn't read', but this one really got my attention. As the guys above pointed out, it's very well written, as it gives you an insight into the technical background, but not to the level that non-technical people wouldn't understand.

    The only part that I found a bit 'short' is the last section about future development - guys could mention ext4 and estimate possible developments a bit more as well ... but that's a minor point, in total I rate this one as a must-read for anybody deeper interested into computing at least a bit ;-)
  • frogman54, on 03/17/2008, -5/+9My BFS got really messed up when my BFF spilled a BLT on my HD. I didn't backup on DVD so I guess I'm SOL.
    • bevans, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2LAME
    • frogman54, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1I agree. No one paid for it, but I should still give the people who read that comment some money back. I assume everyone accepts WoW gold.
    • iJump, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1I see what you did there.
  • mikedoth, on 03/17/2008, -1/+9I hope the open source BeOS recreation Haiku-OS takes off. It is so fast compared to any other OS i've used.
    • mikedoth, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Dugg me down for what reason? BeOS used the BFS file system and so will Haiku.
      • agildehaus, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2FYI: BeOS used the "BeFS" filesystem, not "BFS". There's a substantial difference, as "BFS" is a real filesystem as well. Haiku uses their own port, which is known as "OpenBeFS".
  • RadiatedAnt, on 03/17/2008, -4/+1BFS? Big Fat System
  • korbendallas68, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4Did they really have to refer to Gary Kildall as being so "Lazy" all the time? Author got a problem with him?
    • Ratteler, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4Lazy is a good thing. The most important device of the 20th century was NOT the TV, but the TV Remote.
      Necessity gets you to invent a "band aid" for a problem. Laziness gets you to invent a way to not be cut in the first place.
    • waldo686, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2my college instructor told our class be as lazy as you can (like in this article) because it can help you out in the long run
  • harveywalbanger, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3I laughed, I cried. It was the best read I've had in over a decade.
  • TnTBass, on 03/17/2008, -1/+8ZFS - the holy grail of file systems.
    • brad016, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3Yes, it is a sexy modern FS that will do everything but cook your dinner for you, but like what the article says, it needs maturing.
      • BrainInAJar, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4It's quite mature & a couple companies have been using it in production for over a year without problem.

        There are still some issues if you want to shrink a filesystem, or move from a raid1 to a raid2, but overall it's quite reliable.
      • TnTBass, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2I agree with BrainInAJar, I know it is being deployed in Datacenters already, on live, mission critical, production environments.
  • Kisama, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3Very readable. Reminds me of "In the beginning was the command line."
  • pyrates, on 03/17/2008, -3/+6Dugg for the pot shot that Linus took at Apple users and its file system. Cause we all know no matter how right someone is about an apple product with a bad function, the apple faith will defend it until the end.
  • hexydes, on 03/17/2008, -5/+3The one point this article drives home (or should drive home), is how ridiculous it is that there are different file systems for every operating platform, and even different file systems within operating platforms. If there was one standard, open file system for all platforms, storage and file system technology would advance at a much faster pace. I know the main reason for companies like Microsoft and Apple not wanting this is because they have no interest in interoperability between their platforms, but at the end of the day, it's not like it is impossible to go from one to the other (just use a CD/DVD or the Internet), it's just a pain in the ass for end-users, when it should be much easier.

    Just another example in a gigantic list of the tech industry screwing over every single user, all in the name of trying to have control over every facet of the industry.
    • 3Den, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2It's not ridiculous at all... every approach has it's strengths and weaknesses. IT's also not that they don't want interoperability.. it's that you don't go changing something like your core filesystem unless there is a good upside.

      Changing Windows or OSX to, say, ext3, would not have any real benefit for the vast majority of users out there... they wouldn't even know the difference - so why bother?

    • init100, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1There are actually different strengths and weaknesses in each file system. Some file systems are best for rotating rewritable media, such as hard drives, while other file systems are better for flash media. Even other file systems are best for read-only media, such as CDROMs and DVD-ROMs.

      In addition, file systems must support the features of the operating systems that they are planned to work on. NTFS needs to handle Windows permission system, while probably not supporting the POSIX permission system very well. Ext3 on the other hand supports POSIX permissions while not Windows permissions. Etc, etc.
  • nurriz, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2What a great article! I learned some stuff, and got some things cleared up. This is indeed a submission in the true original spirit of digg. Educational, well-written and relevant.
  • maz2331, on 03/18/2008, -0/+6Reiser is a killer filesystem... or is that a killer's filesystem. I get confused by that one....
  • hackertamer, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Why not AFS to ZFS?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_file_system
    • init100, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1AFS is not really comparable to ZFS, as AFS is a distributed file system while ZFS is a local file system.
  • kelfy, on 03/18/2008, -4/+0that is great read. I'm lovin it...mmm
    http://www.nicheshop.co.nz
  • sholde4, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2It's hard to make file systems interesting. This guy pulled it off.
  • gabgabcortez, on 04/08/2008, -0/+0Great work.
    You made techie boring stuff readable and fun!!!
    am looking forward to your next article ... you have one already?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.