from the description here http://www.djesys.com/vms/freevms/mentor/rms.html so who cares here ?
RMS is not a filesystem, but more a CAS type of data repository On Dec 8, 2007 7:04 AM, Anton B. Rang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > NOTHING anton listed takes the place of ZFS > > That's not surprising, since I didn't list any file systems. > > Here's a few file systems, and some of their distinguishing features. None > of them do exactly what ZFS does. ZFS doesn't do what they do, either. > > QFS: Very, very fast. Supports segregation of data from metadata, and > classes of data. Supports SAN access to data. > > XFS: Also fast; works efficiently on multiprocessors (in part because > allocation can proceed in parallel). Supports SAN access to data (CXFS). > Delayed allocation allows temporary files to stay in memory and never even be > written to disk (and improves contiguity of data on disk). > > JFS: Another very solid journaled file system. > > GPFS: Yet another SAN file system, with tighter semantics than QFS or XFS; > highly reliable. > > StorNext: Hey, it's another SAN file system! Guaranteed I/O rates (hmmm, > which XFS has too, at least on Irix) -- a key for video use. > > SAMFS: Integrated archiving -- got petabytes of data that you need virtually > online? SAM's your man! (well, at least your file system) > > AdvFS: A journaled file system with snapshots, integrated volume management, > online defragmentation, etc. > > VxFS: Everybody knows, right? Journaling, snapshots (including writable > snapshots), highly tuned features for databases, block-level change tracking > for more efficient backups, etc. > > There are many, many different needs. There's a reason why there is no "one > true file system." > > -- Anton > > > Better yet, you get back to writing that file system > > that's going to fix all these horrible deficiencies > > in zfs. > > Ever heard of RMS? > > A file system which supports not only sequential access to files, or random > access, but keyed access. (e.g. "update the record whose key is 123")? > > A file system which allowed any program to read any file, without needing to > know about its internal format? (so such an indexed file could just be read > as a sequence of ordered records by applications which processed ordinary > text files.) > > A file system which could be shared between two, or even more, running > operating systems, with direct access from each system to the disks. > > A file system with features like access control with alarms, MAC security on > a per-file basis, multiple file versions, automatic deletion of temporary > files, verify-after-write. > > You probably wouldn't be interested; but others would. It solves a particular > set of needs (primarily in the enterprise market). It did it very well. It > did it some 30 years before ZFS. It's very much worthwhile listening to > those who built such a system, and their experiences, if your goal is to > learn about file systems. Even if they don't suffer fools gladly. > > ==== > > If you've got a problem for which ZFS is the best solution, great. Use it. > But don't think that it solves every problem, nor that it's perfect for > everyone -- even you. > > (One particular area to think about -- how do you back up your multi-terabyte > pool? And how do you restore an individual file from your backups?) > > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Blog: http://fakoli.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
