Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!arcsun.arc.ab.ca!arcsun!kenw From: kenw@skyler.calarc.ARC.AB.CA (Ken Wallewein) Newsgroups: comp.os.misc Subject: Re: What constitutes a good OS? (re: file systems) Message-ID: Date: 15 Jan 91 13:18:20 GMT References: <41679@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <1211@cvbnetPrime.COM> Sender: nobody@arc.ab.ca (Absolutely Nobody) Organization: Alberta Research Council, Calgary Alberta, Canada Lines: 22 In-Reply-To: aperez@cvbnet.UUCP's message of 15 Jan 91 16:23:24 GMT Some want a stream of bytes; some want a fully structured data file. I want both. I want to be able to choose. When one is dealing with complex non-volatile data structures, a stream of bytes file can be awkward. Suppose one is using shared record access, and a process crashes? It's nice to have the OS cooperate to clear the locks. On the other hand, when one _doesn't_ want records, being forced to deal with them can be a pain. Seems to me what we need is an object-oriented OS. In a sense, that's what record-oriented file systems are trying to give us. Both approaches, however, are getting a little old. -- /kenw Ken Wallewein A L B E R T A kenw@noah.arc.ab.ca R E S E A R C H (403)297-2660 C O U N C I L