🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct29.073135.2304@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> trunz@inf.ethz.ch (Paul Martin Trunz) writes:
>In article <1992Oct28.231706.21563@news2.cis.umn.edu> wisdom@geom.umn.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Oct27.234701.7363@Princeton.EDU> sksircar@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
>>(Subrata Sircar) writes:
>>> NeXT Year.
>>..
>>> NeXTStep 4.0 will substitute a database approach using Object Design
>>> technology for the traditional file system.
>>..
>>Argh! I wish this rumor would die out NOW! While it's true that NeXT is looking
>>to add this to 4.0, it most certainly will not *replace* the file system. While
>Whats wrong with putting an OO-Database engin beneath the well known UNIX
>filesystem-interface ? You would not even notice it except a change
>(hopefully up) in performance. No apps will break, except those who rely on
>internal features of the filesystem.

    It sounds, to me, totally foolish.	A better idea would be to clean up
    and document support for custom filesystems (i.e. virtual filesystems)
    and implement the database that way.  Same result.

					    -Matt

>>
>>- Scott Wisdom
>>wisdom@geom.umn.edu
>
>   greetins
>
>							Patru
>--
>
>
>creating a suitably witty signature
>is left as a hexercise to the reader.

--

    Matthew Dillon		dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US
    1005 Apollo Way		uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon
    Incline Village, NV. 89451	ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    USA 			Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000