This post resulted from a question on one of the mailing lists I read
responding to
HP code release.
> what are it's benefits compared to ext3, ext4, jfs, reiserfs etc?
That's not the correct comparison. In AdvFS you mount a fileset
that may be stored on several volumes (partitions). So the correct
comparison should be to:
1. Either Zfs, or
2. LVM + traditional filesystems.
BTW: IIRC, when LVM1 was developed for Linux, there was a debate
within kernel community about the pros/cons of modular approach
(separate volume management abstraction and separate file system
abstraction) against an integrative approach as existed in AdvFS
(that debate predated Zfs by ~10 years).
> What can be done with AdvFS that can't be done today on Linux?
Just like asking what can be done with ext3 that cannot be done with
e.g: xfs?
Each storage solution has different tradeoffs. The hard question
is if the unique behaviour of this solution justify the extra burden
of development and maintenance. On the other hand it's an interesting
piece of code which is very mature technology (15+ years) and include
high end features that are only becoming common in recent years
(distributed storage, online resize, snapshotting, defrag, etc).
An interesting aside: I downloaded the docs and peeked into the training
material, which is a set of PDF's. As I always do, I looked into the
document properties (Alt+Return in evince).... and lo and behold,
the "Producer:" string is ..... (look for yourselves, it begins with
a capital O ;-)
[yes, they obviously did the most logical step in converting old
and bit-rotten powerpoint slides to something sane]
