Microsoft Announces ReFS, a New Filesystem For Windows 8 459
bonch writes "Microsoft has shared details about its new filesystem called ReFS, which stands for Resilient File System. Codenamed 'Protogon,' ReFS will first appear as the storage system for Windows Server and later be offered to Windows clients. Microsoft plans to deprecate lesser-used NTFS features while maintaining 'a high degree of compatibility' for most uses. NTFS has been criticized in the past for its inelegant architecture."
Re:My preview of ReFS (Score:3, Interesting)
How does it compare to ZFS in terms of resilience? After all, it's in the damn name.
Re:My preview of ReFS (Score:4, Interesting)
Great. What does that mean for users?
Amateurs: Nothing at all.
"Know-a-bit's": Almost nothing.
Professional users: Nothing we couldn't do before.
State-of-the-art, top-dog, storage-gods: Nothing very special or new at all.
Now, if you'd said that it finally supported WinFS-style file tagging and searching, then you'd have ticked lots of boxes for all manner of users. As it is, it's a "slightly better filesystem than before" and hardly newsworthy (out of all your "features", I only spot one that you can't already do with Windows alone and that would ever be exposed to someone NOT using bit-level access to the drive - file level encryption).
Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't say that I've ever used any of the NTFS features they're planning to drop.
I do wish Windows had a sane soft-link system like *nix does; I've yet to run into an application that automatically dereferences a .lnk when opening it. You have to futz around with opening the link manually, reading it's redirect, and then opening THAT instead. Very crude and ugly.
But more to the point, I didn't see much about what might be NEW with this file system, only what's OLD and being discarded.
Mind you, some basic feature cleanup never hurt anyone. But if that's the case, why not NTFS2 instead of a marketing buzzword?
NTFS up to EXT4 speeds? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not a filesystem guru. I stick to programming in the application space mostly. But I have noticed a large time discrepency compiling a large project using EXT4 vs NTFS. EXT4 being multiple times faster then doing the same compile on an NTFS. My question now is, will ReFS bring those times up to similar values?
PS. Also looking at the dropped support for short names, i think quite a few server batch files will be broken.
When NTFS was introduced... (Score:5, Interesting)
.
I have to wonder how much of the pre-release ReFS hype will prove to be true in the coming years.
Re:My preview of ReFS (Score:0, Interesting)
DavidSell [slashdot.org], ByOhTek [slashdot.org], antitithenai [slashdot.org], Bonch [slashdot.org], Dtech [slashdot.org] and others are psuedonyms/sockpuppets used by the Waggener Edstrom rapid response team employed by MS to astroturf discussions in favour of MS and to attack any point of view which isn't favourable to MS and supportive of their interests.
http://waggeneredstrom.com/about/approach [waggeneredstrom.com]
Mod accordingly
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:My preview of ReFS (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree on the 'paid' part. The posts are too incompetent. It seems more like a "I'll make MS look bad by posting this crap" type thing.
Windows doesn't need a new disk based filesystem. (Score:3, Interesting)
It needs some way to securely mount a remote filesystem. SMB and non-anonymous FTP shouldn't be used over the internet ever. It wouldn't be too bad except that FTP is incredibly difficult to reliably tunnel due to it opening connections in both directions on random ports. I would be a happy person if Windows added native support for sftp.
Re:NTFS is resilient! (Score:4, Interesting)
Journalling most certainly does not rely on luck and timing! Under heavy I/O, journalling can guarantee filesystem data integrity (modulo coding bugs).
Back in the real world, journalling is generally only used for metadata, and many hard drives lie when you ask them to flush their cache to disk. So even if the drive doesn't lie and your journal works, the actual file data -- you know, the stuff you actually care about -- may well be trashed.
Re:Hi, GreatBunzinni--a message from the accused (Score:4, Interesting)
You are confused. The only time I've bothered pointing out that the bonch [slashdot.org] account and Overly Critical Guy [slashdot.org] accounts are sockpuppet accounts was in this comment [slashdot.org], after I read this comment [slashdot.org] blowing your cover. And since then I've also stumbled on this comment [slashdot.org], which provides further evidence. Are you also going to claim that I am chrb?
And rest assure. I have some time to spare about now which I will waste replying to bonch/overly critical guy posts with messages pointing out that they are sockpuppet accounts. You can thank your personal attacks for this one.