Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 30 Jun 1999 23:13:21 +0200 | | From | Marc Mutz <> | | Subject | Re: Summary of how linux can best avoid the need for streams |
| |
Frank Butter wrote: > > On 30-Jun-99 Richard Gooch wrote: > > Hans Reiser writes: > >> > >> I am not saying put an FS into a file, I am saying make the filesystem > >> effective enough that nobody needs to create things like structured > >> storage. Given that as a goal, what is needed? > > > > I don't even concede this goal. In some cases "structured storage" > > inside a file is quite reasonable and efficient. > > > > However, I would agree that for some applications that FS-based > > structured storage is much better than file-based structured storage. > > just an idea (maybe it's not that new, plz don't flame me...). > couldn't one think about a filesystem beeing just a database > including several possibilities of structuring > (structure as a method defined right before access fitting the > specific needs of that access) and with several levels of access > allowing different "views" for different userlevels? > of course, this is just a theoretical view, there still would have > to be found a proper implementation allowing a > reasonable performance... > Isn't that what BeOS does? Has anyone experience with the BeFS (or whatever it's called?)? How it performs in contrast to classical fs's?
Marc
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |