[HN Gopher] DBOS: A DBMS-oriented Operating System [pdf]
___________________________________________________________________
DBOS: A DBMS-oriented Operating System [pdf]
Author : matt_d
Score : 50 points
Date : 2022-01-29 18:09 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (vldb.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (vldb.org)
| tracyhenry wrote:
| DBOS was presented at the CIDR conference a couple weeks ago:
| https://youtu.be/L4LsYda9hKU
| indymike wrote:
| This idea has been around for a while... BeOS allowed for
| indexing and metadata which allowed you to use the file system a
| lot like a relational database. It was a really cool feature and
| made it easy to write software that stored tabular data. MS tried
| back in the Windows Longhorn era... and gave up on it. I think
| there's more than one 70s and 80s era big iron OS that did this,
| too.
|
| The file system has been really hard to get rid of - it hides a
| surprising lot of details on how bits get read and written from
| hardware, and that hardware has changed a lot in the past
| decades. SQLite is a great codebase to look at to see what really
| goes on there.
| zokier wrote:
| Filesystem is small aspect here, the big deal here is putting
| stuff like task scheduling and IPC on top of DBMS. And even for
| files, the point here is more on having distributed filesystem
| as first-class citizen and less on being able to do sql-like
| queries.
| AtlasLion wrote:
| reminds me a lot of IBM OS400.
| melony wrote:
| Maybe Google can add a NFS frontend to Spanner, I wonder what
| that would look like.
| taywrobel wrote:
| Probably would be better to try this as a layer on top of
| FoundationDB.
|
| It was kind of designed to be a distributed systems building
| block that you can develop interfaces on top of without
| worrying much about implementing the durability, consistency,
| or distribution of data.
| dang wrote:
| There was a small thread recently (we invited matt_d to repost):
|
| _DBOS: A DBMS-oriented Operating System [pdf]_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29803799 - Jan 2022 (6
| comments)
| CalChris wrote:
| I remember back in the day, overly Unix people had a mantra, _a
| filesystem is not a database_ which is kind of a non-sentence
| like a _Macintosh is not a typewriter_ , also common at the time.
|
| The dominant storage technology then, disks, had structure and
| performance was determined largely by that structure. Ignoring
| that structure did not solve the performance problem. I thought
| that maybe a filesystem actually needed a schema and wrote a
| semester paper for that for CS262.
|
| Well that went over like a lead balloon. It's less necessary now
| with SSDs, but I often think that Unix/Linux oversimplifies and
| then pays technical debt for decades for having adopted a simpler
| approach than VMS/...
| pjmlp wrote:
| It is just another example of all the things UNIX people
| decided to ignore, yet thanks to Worse is Better, now it is
| everywhere with plenty of technical debt to fix.
| SigmundA wrote:
| Seems obvious to me that a file system is a type of hierarchal
| k/v database.
| GauntletWizard wrote:
| And the success of VMS in the modern era speaks to that.
| zokier wrote:
| Feels like someone took hadoop and osquery and smashed them
| together. And like hadoop it feels like overkill if you don't
| have a large cluster of computers to distribute work on.
| marcodiego wrote:
| These kinds of ideas always remember me of WinFS.
| SigmundA wrote:
| Maybe one day we will finally get orthogonally persistent os that
| is not niche: http://tunes.org/wiki/orthogonal_20persistence.html
| mmcgaha wrote:
| I am sure there are a lot of details that I missed, but this
| sounds a lot like an IBM i series. If this is free software I can
| see a market for it. If this is commercial software then . . .
| well I don't know good luck.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-01-29 23:00 UTC)