Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!think!ames!sdcsvax!ucbvax!ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU!leres
From: leres@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Craig Leres)
Newsgroups: comp.os.eunice
Subject: Re: Eunice can't deal with 5-part newsgroup names
Message-ID: <18960@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Mon, 18-May-87 17:49:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.18960
Posted: Mon May 18 17:49:41 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 19-May-87 05:50:03 EDT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: leres@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Craig Leres)
Lines: 21

The filesystem VMS uses is called files-11, level 2. It's basically the
same file system used by RSX-11M (called files-11, level 1) with the
addition of futuristic features such as named directories. Level 1 is
upwards compatible with level 2. This means you can mount RSX disks
under VMS. This feature eases migration from the PDP-11 to the Vax (or
so DEC claimed). But the price is high; you get to run with a
filesystem designed in the stone ages. There are bound to be limits
that are ridiculous by today's standards.

The directory depth limit doesn't bother me nearly as much as the lack
of performance the VMS filesystem displays. (For the most part) it does
512 byte disk I/O. Note that the BSD "fast" filesystem does 8k disk I/O
by default.

But instead of making trivial changes (like allowing directories to get
12 levels deep instead of 8) why don't we throw VMS away and start
over? Trying to patch design flaws in over a MILLION lines of bliss and
assembler is not my idea of fun. (And VMS is a prime example of why you
shouldn't pay programmers by the line.)

		Craig