Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 04:05:20 +0200 From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" <karsten@rohrbach.de> To: Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Dwight Tuinstra <tuinstra@clarkson.edu>, freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Journaling Filesystems in bsd? (LFS, anyone?) Message-ID: <20001001040520.D83678@rohrbach.de> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10009251438350.78979-100000@login-1.eunet.no>; from mbendiks@eunet.no on Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 02:40:21PM %2B0200 References: <xzpzokwzxi9.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10009251438350.78979-100000@login-1.eunet.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marius Bendiksen(mbendiks@eunet.no)@Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 02:40:21PM +0200: [...] > more proper such filesystem. Or, get someone to port WAFL, and get NVRAM. this would be an interesting thing. with all the negative points of nvram you got a few good points in wafl design which might be of interest when it comes to lots of disks carrying one filesystem: a) metadata is contained in files b) those files are successors, referenced by the last on-volume snap c) spreading the file system over a bunch of disks is easy, also without lvm by design d) devices in a bunch can be different size e) you can hot-grow the filesystem (if your hardware supports hot-plug) f) you can have as many files as you wish (or limit in your hashing structure) on a volume g) linear write window over all devices is netapp's wafl concept patented somehow? /k -- > 71: 69 with two fingers up your ass. -- George Carlin KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001001040520.D83678>