Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932135AbVKVGeo (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:34:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932143AbVKVGen (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:34:43 -0500 Received: from dsl092-053-140.phl1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.92.53.140]:25221 "EHLO grelber.thyrsus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932135AbVKVGen (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:34:43 -0500 From: Rob Landley Organization: Boundaries Unlimited To: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: what is our answer to ZFS? Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:34:34 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Diego Calleja References: <11b141710511210144h666d2edfi@mail.gmail.com> <200511211252.04217.rob@landley.net> <20051122004531.GA15189@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20051122004531.GA15189@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200511220034.34266.rob@landley.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1367 Lines: 29 On Monday 21 November 2005 18:45, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > Sun is proposing it can predict what storage layout will be efficient for > > as yet unheard of quantities of data, with unknown access patterns, at > > least a couple decades from now. It's also proposing that data > > compression and checksumming are the filesystem's job. Hands up anybody > > who spots conflicting trends here already? Who thinks the 128 bit > > requirement came from marketing rather than the engineers? > > Actually, if you are storing information in single protons, I'd say > you _need_ checksumming :-). You need error correcting codes at the media level. A molecular storage system like this would probably look a lot more like flash or dram than it would magnetic media. (For one thing, I/O bandwidth and seek times become a serious bottleneck with high density single point of access systems.) > [I actually agree with Sun here, not trusting disk is good idea. At > least you know kernel panic/oops/etc can't be caused by bit corruption on > the disk.] But who said the filesystem was the right level to do this at? Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/