> >> ... INN is moving towards a database, so if Squid does the same then
> >> what do you gain from a new FS?
>
> >From the point of view of the respective application developers, they gain
> >portability. People want to run INN and Squid on a lot of platforms.
> >OTOH, if Linux had an ideal filesystem on which to run these apps, a lot
> >of people might switch over to our camp.
>
> I'm suddenly thinking of Sun's tempfs (file system which resides in RAM
> and swap and is mounted on /tmp). I've heard many reports of it being
> buggy (doesn't get the testing that other FSs get) and it's got it's own
> special drawbacks (you really don't want to run out of space). This is the
> only case I can think of where someone has created a FS for a single
> purpose, and it hasn't been that successful IMHO.
Umm. I think some people have slightly missed the point.
I was orginally asking about moving the inodes structures into the the
directories that reference them.
This is a change that has no user visible effects are than speeding up
cache misses for operations that need access to the inode.
Doesn't change any semantics at all. Doesn't make anything
slower.
The fact that one particular application will show order of magnitude
improvements from it is my driving force, it's by no means the only
application that would benifit.
It's a fairly simple filesystem optimization.
Calling it an 'application specific filesystem' is most definately
missing the point.
Michael.