Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.imnet.ad.jp!wnoc-tyo-news!news.iij.ad.jp!news.CET.CO.JP!usenet From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.aix Subject: Re: ISP hardware/software choices (performance comparison) Date: 14 Jan 1996 11:14:41 GMT Organization: CATENA Enterprise Technologies Lines: 76 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <4daoj2$d5t@diablo.cet.co.jp> References: <4cmopu$d35@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4crnbe$8a@olympus.nwnet.net> <4cs2kn$kfg@cynic.portal.ca> <4cu7t0$mg5@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <4cv8j1$59k@park.uvsc.edu> <4cvjpk$rpf@durban.vector.co.za> <4d4s3u$u3@news.voicenet.com> <4d70n5$6lp@diablo.cet.co.jp> <4d9i2k$qo9@park.uvsc.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: a04m.cet.co.jp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:1959 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2103 comp.unix.solaris:57231 comp.unix.aix:68708 Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> wrote: >Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> wrote: >] >] I guess there is no end to the bickering amoung the various Unix camps. >] Aren't the Unix wars supposed to be over? > >They were until Sun bought out their license for SVR4 sources >so that their code could diverge again. > >BTW: it would be legal for Sun to put the SVR4 code they bought >out up for anonymous FTP. > >] The positive side of friendly competition can described by looking at >] something like the file system. >] >] SYSV has s5fs. >] >] BSD makes ffs. >] >] SYSV adopts ffs calls it ufs and implements it within its >] vnode/vfs framework. This facilitates the development of >] new file systems such as vxfs journaling file system, and nfs. > >Uh, the Usenix VFS papers were all based on SunOS. > >As was Heidemann's Ficus work at UCLA. > >As was Rosenthal's work. Sorry, I skipped some history. >You are probably thinking of the "file system switch", not the >VFS (which implies vnodes) interface. > >VXFS is a UFS derivitive. The directory structure is identical, >as is the flexname handling. > Didn't vnode/vfs facilitate it implementation? >You also forgot "USL files suit against UCB and forces them to >not distribute some portions of UFS". I also forgot to mention Digital had gnodes. We can go on and on. >] The BSD community reimplements vnode/vfs and nfs; and adds >] stackable vnodes, union mounts, and the portal file system. > >Sun invented VFS. You could argue that it was a reimplementation >of fsswitch[], until you looked at the location that the in core >copy of the on disk inode data was stored in both models. > >Portals are old. The Heidemann architecture for vnode stacking >was work done at UCLA, not UCB. Union mounts are a special case >of volume spanning (like the Sun TFS and loopback mountin from >4.x). > >] With WinNT amoung us the bickering needs to end and the Unix >] vendors need to find new ways to be cooperate and be >] competive by delivering better quality systems and better >] service. > >It's not going to happen. There is no way to add value to >non-commodity hardware, other than divergence. There's no >way for products to compete on commodity hardware without >divergence. > >You can't pull a value proposition out of a hat. Unless it were necessary for survival. -- Mike Hancock michaelh@cet.co.jp