Non-hierarchical file system

3 thoughts on “Non-hierarchical file system”

1. “We don’t need no steenking files

   The file system is an artifact of the limitations of early processors that had no memory virtualization capabilities and had an insufficient memory address word size. Programs and data had to be marshalled out of and back into a logically distinct store because 64K can only hold so much information. Modern 32 and 64 bit processors with memory management units can treat storage as large, slow, persistent memory obviating the contortions required in conventional operating systems to keep data from going away when the computer is shut down.

   A heirarchical name space is still required for users to keep track of where they put things but virtual memory can hold that tree structure just as well as inodes can and the judicious use of separate memory spaces can side-step a 4 gigabyte limitation for storage on 32-bit machines.”

   http://web.archive.org/web/20081120092935/http://www.memetech.com/nofiles.html

   LikeLiked by 1 person

2. “The Nightmare of Hierarchical Directories

   Hierarchical directories were invented around 1947– I should check this– when somebody said, “How are we going to keep track of all these files? “Gee, why don’t we make a file that’s a list of filenames?” And that was the directory. It’s a temporary fix that doesn’t scale up.

   Real projects for ordinary people tend to overlap, interpenetrate, and constantly change. The software requirement of their staying in one place with a fixed name is inane. The problem is much harder.”

   http://xanadu.com.au/ted/TN/WRITINGS/TCOMPARADIGM/tedCompOneLiners.html

   LikeLike

   1. Sort of the issue that federated wiki is addressing. Just needs a lot more work.
      @fortyfoxes has been building lots more small code tools (using livecode) for federated wiki that make it a more dynamic environment.
      https://github.com/fedwiki

      LikeLiked by 1 person

Comments are closed.