What is Digg?56 Comments
- ha3er0, on 06/16/2009, -2/+48ReiserFS for life!!
Oh wait... - yevkasem, on 10/13/2008, -1/+35even if its not true, it feels like linux is advancing faster than windows and os x simply because of the transparency of open source development. maybe if microsoft and apple tried selling me on technology instead of marketing i'd be more likely to switch.
- FrostedJin, on 10/13/2008, -2/+36As a recent linux adopter and a computer scientist, I'm glad advances to the core of the platforms continues at the same blistering pace that advances to the top end does.
- mvent2, on 10/14/2008, -1/+19Considering its a murder charge I'd say "for life" is accurate...
- Giga, on 10/14/2008, -0/+13Being locked up in a basement somewhere with nothing to do but code sounds more like a reward than a punishment for him.
- inactive, on 10/14/2008, -0/+13sorry for being a newb
but what are the disadvantages of ext3? - schestowitz, on 10/13/2008, -6/+19ZFS for Linux (patents and all resolved) is probably just a matter of time.
- mcrules, on 10/14/2008, -0/+12"They agreed on btrfs, which was written from the ground up by Oracle's Mason based on his prior Novell work with the Linux-based reiserfs file system."
Wow, looks like Hans Reiser's legacy lives on, even if the new filesystem is only based off of ReiserFS, and doesnt use any of the code, it shows the guy was the top of his game. - Culyt, on 10/14/2008, -0/+12There are 56 patents on ZFS from sun (possibly more by now):
http://h3g3m0n.wordpress.com/2007/06/09/zfs-on-lin ... - TehDoctor, on 10/14/2008, -0/+12I don't know why someone dugg you down for being honest. They probably don't even know the answer.
Ext3's backwards compatibility is a disadvantage, it has some rather low limits on things like number of subdirectories, it is nearly impossible to defragment (not that fragmentation is a huge issue with these kinds of FS, but it still sucks), there's no checksumming in the journal.
Look at the Wikipedia article on ext3 for more discussion :-) - TehDoctor, on 10/14/2008, -3/+13Ext is not a 1970s filesystem, you dolt.
- inactive, on 10/14/2008, -1/+9hans has lots of free time on his hands, so why not let him code as part of his 'rehabilitation'? his file system didn't murder anyone.
- SEJeff, on 10/14/2008, -0/+8If sun wanted ZFS on linux, they would dual license it under CDDL and gplv2. The FACT that they haven't shows how much they want it in Linux.
- TehDoctor, on 10/14/2008, -0/+8Some of the Namesys people are working on Reiser 4 in their free time. Hans isn't vital to the project, the filesystem design is done. It's getting the code quality high enough to get it out of "experimental" that's holding the FS back.
- jamesdew, on 10/14/2008, -0/+7How do you respond when people pose this question to you?
- tama00, on 10/14/2008, -4/+9Whoa is that the most generalised comment ive ever read on digg.
You may as well just wrote 'I like computers' its hardly any different.
FYI the file system within Linux is being updated all the time! Its not the same 1970s file system! If you are arguing that sure its updated but the core code is going to change then just read this quote from the article.
".. and is backward-compatible with 3 because it is built on the same code base; retaining the same code base..."
So the article title is a bunch of fluff talk about crap just as your comment. The only reason why people digg this ***** is beacuse it says 'Linux', 'new' and 'advance' in the title and taken that good amount of digg users dont read the actual article. - lemur, on 10/14/2008, -0/+5I like turtles.
- atomiku, on 10/14/2008, -1/+6ext3 for life!
A new file system without the disadvantages of ext3 wouldn't hurt, though. - DrDabbles, on 10/14/2008, -1/+5I can assure you that MS is not currently working on anything like BTRFS, EXT4, or any of the other core advances being worked on in Linux.
With regard to zoozo's comment, quite a lot of work progresses from alpha to beta, and finally released code in the Linux arena. Gnome and KDE are two prime examples. Projects that tend to fizzle out do so because of lack of community interest, or lack of developer support (as you alluded to). None of these are bad things, they simply indicate a focus on more visible items. Moreover, not all ideas that are started on are good or necessary.
The fact that open source development is so open to the world is seen as a detriment by traditionalists. I find them to be wrong. There are lots of "skunkworks" projects at any given company, but they keep the projects hush-hush. The general user base has no idea these projects are being started, so the developers and business people can never really gauge user interest. Opening things up means not only can you find who has interest and why, but you can collaborate with that userbase to provide the features the community truly want. - IamSunstorm, on 10/14/2008, -16/+20The 1970s file system gets an update. Blistering pace!
- mooninite, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4Actually I imagine it has murdered someone. One of the dozens of times it loses integrity, the owner of the data lost their mind and went medieval on someone's ass.
- Ribald_Jester, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4Very glad to see both these filesystems will be released under the GPL.
- spartan777, on 10/14/2008, -1/+4but will this help anyone storing less than 1000's of petabytes?
- priegog, on 10/14/2008, -2/+5Classy
- maninalift, on 10/14/2008, -1/+4Tux3 anyone?
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 10/14/2008, -0/+3They would also work hard to make SPARC a choice for Linux. As of now, it is a hobby project. Do like IBM/HP does and give a choice of platform/OS.
- TnTBass, on 10/14/2008, -0/+3I love the ZFS file system, as it is clearly the best out there right now. However, the patents will make it hard to have it widely adopted beyond Sun's OS, which I think will be their downside.
"The new btrfs file system will be more convenient and robust than ext4, with some key features that couldn't be incorporated without starting from scratch, and it is expected to leapfrog Sun Microsystems Inc.'s ZFS file system on several fronts, he said."
I am really eager to see this one if it truly does leapfrog ZFS and is licensed better. - nybble41, on 10/14/2008, -0/+3I tried using NTFS for my external drive -- I don't use Windows myself, but wanted compatibility with others' systems and the ability to create files over 4GB. I unfortunately discovered that there is no filesystem checker for NTFS; if anything goes wrong (power outage, system crash, accidental disconnection) the filesystem will refuse to mount, and your only recovery option is to have the drive scanned by the native Windows filesystem utilities. Bit of a deal-breaker, that.
For now I'm using FAT32, which is well-supported (in some ways better than Windows), but the 4GB limit remains painful. - foxbuntu, on 10/14/2008, -2/+5As a developer in the Open Source community, I must say, we have a documentation team in our project, I complete my code, I support my code, and the project presents real innovation every single release and supports its previously released software. So until you have some real basis to make such claims. Please don't. You are only embarrassing yourself.
- SEJeff, on 10/16/2008, -0/+2Sun officially supports Ubuntu Dapper on their Sparc stuff. Canonical no longer releases it because there is all of 0 demand for it, but they did support it.
What makes it a hobby in that aspect? - TehDoctor, on 10/15/2008, -0/+2ZFS ZFS ZFS.... no one ever talks about HAMMER
- totalnet, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2What does the btr in btrfs stands for? The only thing comes to mind is "better than Reiser". I see Wikipedia said said Butter FS. I guess it could also be Better FS.
- pHr34kY, on 10/15/2008, -1/+3Fail.
- luken7, on 10/14/2008, -1/+3that was wrong ;-)
- DrDabbles, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2Really? Not even interested in the improvements EXT4 will provide?
- Macskeeball, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2@kebera Yes, he murdered his wife. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Reiser
- maninalift, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2heren is a good overview of linux filesystem future:
http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/Linux_Weather_Fo ... - gnufan, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2I can't see it documented anywhere, but like ReiserFS it uses B-trees extensively, so if I had to hazard a guess.....
The hard bit is getting it ready and integrated into the Linux kernel tree properly - that was the bit that stumped Hans, although he wanted to replace big chunks of old fashioned virtual file system. Then there is persuading folks to use it, Oracle themselves are one of the most conservative organizations when it comes to file system choice, you can run Oracle on almost any file system but if you want full support.... - daftman, on 10/14/2008, -2/+4do sun have patents on zfs?
- skyshock1, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2GFS? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_File_System
- MrViklund, on 10/22/2008, -0/+1Very nice. I can't wait for this one! :)
- jeezers, on 10/14/2008, -1/+2i had to settle for ntfs for my music partition, linux supports ntfs than windows does ext3!
- kebera, on 10/14/2008, -1/+2i missed somenews in reference to Hans Reiser... has he murdered someone? link me pls
- Fergy, on 10/16/2008, -0/+1ReiserFS 4 has been 'finished' since 2004. Why isn't it in the kernel and why have all the major distros that used it abandoned it?
- nybble41, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1@phaedrusiszen - That's what I used. Their filesystem driver works fine, as long as the volume is "clean". They don't provide a filesystem check (fsck) tool, however. The ntfsfix utility they do provide just marks a volume such that the Windows utilities will perform a full scan of the disk, which doesn't help much if you don't have a Windows system handy.
- enterneo, on 10/14/2008, -1/+2I see what you did there...
- phaedrusiszen, on 10/17/2008, -0/+0Check this site out:
http://www.linux-ntfs.org/ - zoozo, on 10/14/2008, -6/+5No that's not the reason. The reason is that they never finish their work rather leave unfinished pieces of codes as alfa, beta, work in progress states, then they all jump onto the new features. Also there is only the "code it yourself if you know it better" support, no support for handicapped people, no real documentation (commenting is not documentation), no serious hardware testing. That's why they have time for "innovation".
- tehmoth, on 10/14/2008, -2/+1why is that good? We wouldn't want to see them in other free-er operating systems?
-
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is