DOCSLIB.ORG

L79 Linux Filesystems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
L79 Linux Filesystems L79 LinuxLinux FilesystemsFilesystems Klaus Bergmann Linux Architecture & Performance IBM Lab Boeblingen zSeries Expo, November 10 -14, 2003 | Hilton, Las Vegas, NV Trademarks The following are trademarks of the International Business Machines Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Enterprise Storage Server ESCON* FICON FICON Express HiperSockets IBM* IBM logo* IBM eServer Netfinity* S/390* VM/ESA* WebSphere* z/VM zSeries * Registered trademarks of IBM Corporation The following are trademarks or registered trademarks of other companies. Intel is a trademark of the Intel Corporation in the United States and other countries. Java and all Java-related trademarks and logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc., in the United States and other countries. Lotus, Notes, and Domino are trademarks or registered trademarks of Lotus Development Corporation. Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds. Microsoft, Windows and Windows NT are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. Penguin (Tux) compliments of Larry Ewing. SET and Secure Electronic Transaction are trademarks owned by SET Secure Electronic Transaction LLC. UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the United States and other countries. * All other products may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies. AgendaAgenda Journaling file systems Measurement setup Measurement results LPAR – VM 31 / 64 bit single disk and LVM DASD statistics CPU load and CP overhead journaling options Outlook ProblemsProblems ofof non-journalingnon-journaling filefile systemssystems data and meta-data is written directly and in arbitrary order no algorithm to ensure data integrity after crash, complete structure of file system has to be checked to ensure integrity file system check times depend on size of file system i risk of data loss i long and costly system outages advantagesadvantages ofof journalingjournaling data integrity ensured in case of system crash only journal has to be replayed to recover consistent file system structure file system check time depends on size of journal i much higher data integrity i much shorter system outages but there is a cost... JournalingJournaling filefile systemssystems inin SuSESuSE SLES8SLES8 ext3 v0.9.18 jfs 1.0.24 reiserfs 3.6.2 For reference : ext2 v0.5 (non-journaling) ext3ext3 developed by Andrew Morton and others based on ext2 extended by journaling features supports full data journaling resizing (only with unmount) possible http://www.zipworld.com.au/~akpm/linux/ext3/ jfsjfs developed by IBM Austin Lab ported from OS/2 Warp Server only metadata journaling max. file system size 4 PB http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/jfs/index.html reiserfsreiserfs developed by a group around Hans Reiser SUSE's default choice only metadata journaling disk space optimization algorithm online enlargement of file system http://www.namesys.com/ MeasurementMeasurement setupsetup Hardware Software 2064-216 (z900) SUSE SLES8 1.09ns (917MHz) Dbench 2 * 16 MB L2 Cache (shared) 64 GB 6 FICON channels 2105-F20 (Shark) 384 MB NVS 16 GB Cache 128 * 36 GB disks 10.000 RPM FICON (1 Gbps) MeasurementMeasurement setupsetup dbench 128MB main memory 1, 2 and 4 CPUs LPAR and z/VM 4.3 31-bit and 64-bit Single 3390 model 3 disk 6 pack of 3390-3 using striped LVM. Attached via 6 FICON channels Running 8 and 16 processes DbenchDbench FileFile I/OI/O Emulation of Netbench benchmark, rates windows fileservers Large set of mixed file operations workload for each process: create, write, read, append, delete Scaling for Linux with 1, 2, 4 PUs Scaling for 8 and 16 clients (processes) simultaneously forced to do I/O while memory is filling up with data MeasurementMeasurement resultsresults LPARLPAR andand VMVM single disk, LPAR and VM, 31bit, 4 CPUs 70 65 60 55 50 45 8 proc., LPAR 40 16 proc., LPAR 35 8 proc., VM 30 16 proc., VM 25 20 Throughput [MB/s] 15 10 5 0 Ext2 Ext3 Jfs Reiserfs filesystem 31-bit31-bit andand 64-bit64-bit single disk, VM, 4 CPUs 65 60 55 50 45 40 8 proc., 31bit 16 proc., 31bit 35 8 proc., 64bit 30 16 proc., 64bit 25 20 Throughput [MB/s] 15 10 5 0 Ext2 Ext3 Jfs Reiserfs filesystem /proc/dasd/statistics – Example root@g73vm1:~# cat /proc/dasd/statistics 56881 dasd I/O requests with 5270816 sectors(512B each) __<4 ___8 __16 __32 __64 _128 _256 _512 __1k __2k __4k __8k _16k _32k _64k 128k _256 _512 __1M __2M __4M __8M _16M _32M _64M 128M 256M 512M __1G __2G __4G _>4G Histogram of sizes (512B secs) 0 0 1039 4799 8102 36557 4475 292 195 1422 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Histogram of I/O times (microseconds) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 109 3244 25570 17480 7666 1248 1390 153 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Histogram of I/O times per sector 0 0 0 0 176 4141 24084 15639 9506 2513 601 173 41 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Histogram of I/O time till ssch 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 301 11527 25339 12278 5156 1759 383 118 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Histogram of I/O time between ssch and irq 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2584 23896 18720 5307 2325 2725 1217 62 23 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Histogram of I/O time between ssch and irq per sector 0 0 0 21722 26243 3939 2184 1798 774 159 47 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Histogram of I/O time between irq and end 7 0 43393 11341 457 179 1494 3 3 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # of req in chanq at enqueuing (1..32) 8 3 4 5 56861 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ext2, 8 Processes Histogram of I/O times (microseconds) 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 __< ___ __1 __3 __6 _12 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 256 512 __1 __2 __4 _>4 4 8 6 2 4 8 6 2 k k k k k k k k 6 2 M M M M M M M M M M G G G G ext2, 16 Proceses Histogram of I/O times (microseconds) 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 __< ___ __1 __3 __6 _12 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 256 512 __1 __2 __4 4 8 6 2 4 8 6 2 k k k k k k k k 6 2 M M M M M M M M M M G G G ext3, 8 Processes Histogram of I/O times (microseconds) 3000 2750 2500 2250 2000 1750 1500 1250 1000 750 500 250 0 __< ___ __1 __3 __6 _12 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 256 512 __1 __2 __4 4 8 6 2 4 8 6 2 k k k k k k k k 6 2 M M M M M M M M M M G G G ext3, 16 Processes Histogram of I/O times (microseconds) 15000 14000 13000 12000 11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 __< ___ __1 __3 __6 _12 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 256 512 __1 __2 __4 4 8 6 2 4 8 6 2 k k k k k k k k 6 2 M M M M M M M M M M G G G ext3, 16 Processes Histogram of I/O time before SSCH (IOSQ) 13000 12000 11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 __< ___ __1 __3 __6 _12 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 _25 _51 __1 __2 __4 __8 _16 _32 _64 128 256 512 __1 __2 __4 4 8 6 2 4 8 6 2 k k k k k k k k 6 2 M M M M M M M M M M G G G Ext3, 16 Processes Histogram of I/O time between SSCH and IRQ 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 __ __ __ __ __ _1 _2 _5 __ __ __ __ _1 _3 _6 12 _2 _5 __ __ __ __ _1 _3 _6 12 25 51 __ __ __ <4 _8 16 32 64 28 56 12 1k 2k 4k 8k 6k 2k 4k 8k 56 12 1M 2M 4M 8M 6M 2M 4M 8M 6M 2M 1G 2G 4G Ext3, 16 Processes number of requests in subchannel-queue at enqueuing 60000 55000 50000 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 1 2 3 4 5 LogicalLogical VolumeVolume ManagerManager (LVM)(LVM) Linux software raid with raid levels 0,1, 4 and 5 excellent performance excellent flexibility (resizing, adding/removing disks) available in SLES7, SLES8, and RedHat RHEL 3 on zSeries, support multipath and PAV (under z/VM) http://www.sistina.com/products_lvm.htm LVMLVM systemsystem structurestructure (journaled) file system Logical Volume Manager RAID adapter physical physical RAID disk disk array ImprovingImproving diskdisk performanceperformance withwith LVMLVM striped datastream physical physical physical volume volume volume With LVM and striping parallelism is achieved LVMLVM resultsresults single disk - LVM comparison, z/VM, 31bit, 2 CPUs 130 120 110 100 90 80 8 proc., LVM 70 16 proc., LVM 60 8 proc., single disk 16 proc., single disk 50 40 Throughput [MB/s] 30 20 10 0 Ext2 Ext3 Jfs Reiserfs filesystem filesystemfilesystem optionsoptions single disk, ext3 optimizations, z/VM, 31bit, 4 CPUs single disk, reiserfs optimizations, z/VM, 31bit, 4 CPUs 45 50 40 45 40 35 35 30 30 8 processes 25 16 processes 25 20 20 15 15 Throughput [MB/s] Throughput [MB/s] 10 10 5 5 0 0 default no hash no border no ordered writeback full data external 100M 200M 400M relocation allocation unhashed journal journal journal journal relocation single disk, jfs optimizations, z/VM, 31bit, 4 CPUs 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 Throughput [MB/s] 10 5 0 default external 100M journal 200 MB journal journal CPUCPU loadload LPAR, 1 CPU, 8 processes, single disk 100 90 80 70 60 idle 50 system user CPU load [%] 40 30 20 10 0 ext2, ext2, ext3, ext3, reiserfs, reiserfs, jfs, 31bit jfs, 64bit 31bit 64bit 31bit 64bit 31bit 64bit filesystem VMVM overheadoverhead LVM CPU consumption CP Guest CPU consumption ext2, ext2, ext3, ext3, reiserfs, reiserfs, jfs, 31bit jfs, 31bit 31bit, 31bit 31bit, 31bit 31bit, 31bit, LVM LVM LVM LVM recoveryrecovery timestimes OutlookOutlook onon kernelkernel 2.62.6 journaling filesystem in kernel version 2.4 vs 2.6 60 55 50 45 40 ext3 35 jfs reiserfs 30 25 20 Throughput [MB/s] 15 10 5 0 Kernel 2.4.19 Kernel 2.6.0-test5 preliminary results jfs was not compiled into 2.6 kernel SummarySummary journaling file systems increase data integrity significantly journaling file systems dramatically reduce system outage times performance cost is at least 30% reiserfs is slightly faster than ext3, but needs much more CPU journaling file systems profit from LVM jfs has fastest recovery times 2.6 will bring more improvements (increased throughput, reduced CPU load, iostat for ECKD) QuestionsQuestions ??.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Study of File System Evolution
    Study of File System Evolution Swaminathan Sundararaman, Sriram Subramanian Department of Computer Science University of Wisconsin {swami, srirams} @cs.wisc.edu Abstract File systems have traditionally been a major area of file systems are typically developed and maintained by research and development. This is evident from the several programmer across the globe. At any point in existence of over 50 file systems of varying popularity time, for a file system, there are three to six active in the current version of the Linux kernel. They developers, ten to fifteen patch contributors but a single represent a complex subsystem of the kernel, with each maintainer. These people communicate through file system employing different strategies for tackling individual file system mailing lists [14, 16, 18] various issues. Although there are many file systems in submitting proposals for new features, enhancements, Linux, there has been no prior work (to the best of our reporting bugs, submitting and reviewing patches for knowledge) on understanding how file systems evolve. known bugs. The problems with the open source We believe that such information would be useful to the development approach is that all communication is file system community allowing developers to learn buried in the mailing list archives and aren’t easily from previous experiences. accessible to others. As a result when new file systems are developed they do not leverage past experience and This paper looks at six file systems (Ext2, Ext3, Ext4, could end up re-inventing the wheel. To make things JFS, ReiserFS, and XFS) from a historical perspective worse, people could typically end up doing the same (between kernel versions 1.0 to 2.6) to get an insight on mistakes as done in other file systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Membrane: Operating System Support for Restartable File Systems Swaminathan Sundararaman, Sriram Subramanian, Abhishek Rajimwale, Andrea C
    Membrane: Operating System Support for Restartable File Systems Swaminathan Sundararaman, Sriram Subramanian, Abhishek Rajimwale, Andrea C. Arpaci-Dusseau, Remzi H. Arpaci-Dusseau, Michael M. Swift Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison Abstract and most complex code bases in the kernel. Further, We introduce Membrane, a set of changes to the oper- file systems are still under active development, and new ating system to support restartable file systems. Mem- ones are introduced quite frequently. For example, Linux brane allows an operating system to tolerate a broad has many established file systems, including ext2 [34], class of file system failures and does so while remain- ext3 [35], reiserfs [27], and still there is great interest in ing transparent to running applications; upon failure, the next-generation file systems such as Linux ext4 and btrfs. file system restarts, its state is restored, and pending ap- Thus, file systems are large, complex, and under develop- plication requests are serviced as if no failure had oc- ment, the perfect storm for numerous bugs to arise. curred. Membrane provides transparent recovery through Because of the likely presence of flaws in their imple- a lightweight logging and checkpoint infrastructure, and mentation, it is critical to consider how to recover from includes novel techniques to improve performance and file system crashes as well. Unfortunately, we cannot di- correctness of its fault-anticipation and recovery machin- rectly apply previous work from the device-driver litera- ery. We tested Membrane with ext2, ext3, and VFAT. ture to improving file-system fault recovery. File systems, Through experimentation, we show that Membrane in- unlike device drivers, are extremely stateful, as they man- duces little performance overhead and can tolerate a wide age vast amounts of both in-memory and persistent data; range of file system crashes.
    [Show full text]
  • Zack's Kernel News
    KERNEL NEWS ZACK’S KERNEL NEWS ReiserFS Turmoil Their longer term plan, Alexander Multiport Card driver, again naming In light of recent events surrounding says, depends on what happens with himself the maintainer. Hans Reiser (http:// www. linux-maga- Hans. If Hans is released, the developers Jiri’s been submitting a number of zine. com/ issue/ 73/ Linux_World_News. intend to proceed as before. If he is not patches for these drivers, so it makes pdf), the question of how to continue released, Alexander’s best guess is that sense he would maintain them if he ReiserFS development came up on the the developers will try to appoint a wished; in any event, no other kernel linux-kernel mailing list. Alexander proxy to run Namesys. hacker has spoken up to claim the role. Lyamin from Hans’s Namesys company offered his take on the situation. He said Status of sysctl Filesystem Benchmarks that ReiserFS 3 has pretty much stabi- In keeping with Linus Torvalds’ recent Some early tests have indicated that ext4 lized into bugfix mode, though Suse assertions that it is never acceptable to is faster with disk writes than either ext3 folks had been adding new features like break user-space, Albert Cahalan volun- or Reiser4. There was general interest in ACL support. So ReiserFS 3 would go on teered to maintain the sysctl code if it these results, though the tests had some as before. couldn’t be removed. But Linus pointed problems (the tester thought delayed In terms of Reiser4, however, Alexan- out that really nothing actually used allocation was part of ext4, when that der said that he and the other Reiser de- sysctl (the implication being that it feature has not yet been merged into velopers were still addressing the techni- wouldn’t actually break anything to get Andrew Morton’s tree).
    [Show full text]
  • Weekend Chat
    COMMUNITY FOSDEM 2004 FOSDEM 2004 Weekend Chat FOSDEM is the Free and Open Source Developers Meeting that takes place each year in Belgium’s capital city of Brussels.The meeting can be split into two halves. BY JOHN SOUTHERN Figure 2: Jon “Maddog” Hall explaining history. he first half is the organized talks, Love, who talked about the kernel and Talking lectures and tutorials which take its affects on the desktop. Followed by The second half of FOSDEM is just as Tplace over a weekend, This year 2.6 Internals and then Hans Reiser took important. It is the community activities. started with an opening speech by Tim listeners on a tour of Reiser 4. Those that can spare the Friday evening, O’Reilly of O’Reilly books. Everyone lis- In the tutorials, scripting languages meet in the Roy d’Espagne for an tens to the opening speech and the included Ruby and NetBeans. Everyone evening of Belgian beer. traditional talk by Richard Stallman. then met for the Free Software Award, Although the beer is wonderful, many RMS gave his traditional speech, which was won by Alan Cox, and the do not drink and still go because this is including his Saint IGNUcius sketch, singing of the Free Software song. where you meet up others and get a where he blesses the crowd and indoc- Sunday started with streams on X and chance to chat about what everyone torates them in the Church of Emacs. Java. In the tutorial room, rather than thinks are the important developments. hour long talks, we were treated to sev- This chatting to like minded strangers, Talks enteen short fifteen minute talks.
    [Show full text]
  • Server Manager 8.40 Server Guide for Linux (This Page Intentionally Left Blank.)
    Intel® Server Manager 8.40 Server Guide for Linux (This page intentionally left blank.) ii Table of Contents Introducing Intel Server Manager 8.40 ............................................................................................ 1 Intel® Server Manager 8.40 (server installation) ........................................................................ 1 System requirements .................................................................................................................. 2 Security in Intel Server Manager................................................................................................. 5 User rights ................................................................................................................................... 5 Managing computers ....................................................................................................................... 7 Using power options.................................................................................................................... 7 Managing system inventory............................................................................................................. 9 Computer summary..................................................................................................................... 9 Viewing system data ................................................................................................................. 10 Asset management ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Open Source Software License Information
    Open Source Software license information This document contains an open source software license information for the product VACUU·SELECT. The product VACUU·SELECT contains open source components which are licensed under the applicable open source licenses. The applicable open source licenses are listed below. The open source software licenses are granted by the respective right holders directly. The open source licenses prevail all other license information with regard to the respective open source software components contained in the product. Modifications of our programs which are linked to LGPL libraries are permitted for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications. However, forwarding the information acquired during reverse engineering or debugging to third parties is prohibited. Furthermore, it is prohibited to distribute modified versions of our programs. In any case, the warranty for the product VACUU·SELECT will expire, as long as the customer cannot prove that the defect would also occur without these modification. WARRANTY DISCLAIMER THE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE IN THIS PRODUCT IS DISTRIBUTED IN THE HOPE THAT IT WILL BE USEFUL, BUT WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY, WITHOUT EVEN THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the applicable licenses for more details. Written offer This product VACUU·SELECT contains software components that are licensed by the holder of the rights as free software, or Open Source software, under GNU General Public License, Versions 2 and 3, or GNU Lesser General Public License, Versions 2.1, or GNU Library General Public License, Version 2, respectively. The source code for these software components can be obtained from us on a data carrier (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Filesystems in Linux
    Filesystems in Linux A brief overview and comparison of today's competing FSes. Please save the yelling of obscenities for Q&A. ;-) Files and Directories ● Files and directories allow data to be – Grouped - files – Ordered hierarchically - directories ● Filesystems – Perform 2 functions, broadly speaking ● Manage storage ● Allow user to access data in a certain way – Evolution ● Storage techniques have improved over the years – Database methodologies have seeped in ● Users still have a 20-year old view – Files are, at best, random-access byte-streams Filesystems Today ● Good ol' Ext2 ● Ext3 is Ext2 with journaling added ● Reiser3 is making major inroads ● Reiser4 will be out eventually ● JFS from IBM ● XFS from SGI ● NTFS from...dial M for Microsoft ● All but Ext2/3 use B-Trees or variants – More complex – Faster ● All now provide ACLs Journaling ● From databases ● Keep a log of “transactions” – All operations are atomic – Logging all data is expensive – Log metadata ● Crash? No problem – Replay log – FS is consistent ● Filesystem corruption is far less likely ● Startup time after a crash is much lower Other stuff ● So how do I get this stuff working – Gentoo – comes with Ext2/3, Reiser3, XFS and JFS support (shameless plug) – Slackware – comes with Ext2/3, Reiser3 support – RedHat / Fedora Core– You're stuck with Ext3 – Mandrake – At last count had Ext2/3, Reiser3, and JFS. Anybody know more? Ext2 ● Written by Theodore T'so ● Default for most distros ● Simple – no complex algorithms ● Rock-solid ● But not journaled – Fsck takes ages
    [Show full text]
  • Kernel Architecture File System
    Kernel Architecture File System Kernel File System: Author: SREENIVAS REDDY BATHULA Introduction: Network File System (NFS) protocols are initially developed by SUN Micro Systems and IBM. NFS are end user friendly because of remote system file sharing and friendly authorization. Many File Systems in Linux is possible because of open source code, so everyone have equal chance to develop, make it efficient and compatible for their work. At present there is more then 20 different file systems. The developing file systems can handle huge number of large files competing with time and varies operating system features. Some of the most frequently used file systems, which are present in the market are discussed here briefly. Those file systems are : EXT2, EXT3, EXT4, ReiserFS, GFS, GPFS, JFS, NSS, NTFS, FAT32, NWFS, OCFS2, PMS, VFS, VxFS and XFS. EXT 2/3/4 : EXT2 + Journals = EXT3 EXT3 + POSIX extended file access + htrees = EXT4 EXT4 + EXT3 + extents = ReiserFS Journalling : Journalling is a type of filesystem that handle a log of recent meta-data. Journaling reducess time spent on recovering a filesystem. It is applicable even when we have group of cluster nodes. This meta-data Journalling widely used in Linux. Specially in ReiserFS, XFS, JFS, ext3 and GFS. EXT2 most popular file system. EXT2 stands for 'second extended file system'. It replaced Minix file system. Positive point is data lose protection negative is Ext2 doesn't have journalling so it breaks easily. EXT3 is basically ext2 plus a journal. Fast & robust. You can switch between ext2 and ext3. EXT3 take care about metadata. So you never lose a file.
    [Show full text]
  • OPENSOURCES Voices from the Open Source Revolution Michael Tiemann Future of Cygnus Solutions: an Entrepreneur’S Account
    Eric S. Raymond A Brief History of Hackerdom Marshall Kirk McKusick Twenty Years of Berkeley Unix: From AT&T-Owned to Freely Redistributable Scott Bradner The Internet Engineering Task Force Richard Stallman The GNU Operating System and the Free Software Movement OPENSOURCES Voices from the Open Source Revolution Michael Tiemann Future of Cygnus Solutions: An Entrepreneur’s Account Paul Vixie Software Engineering Linus Torvalds The Linux Edge Robert Young Giving It Away: How Red Hat Software Stumbled Across a New Economic Model and Helped Improve an Industry Larry Wall Diligence, Patience, and Humility Bruce Perens The Open Source Definition Tim O'Reilly Hardware, Software, and Infoware Jim Hamerly and Tom Paquin with Susan Walton Freeing the Source: The Story of Mozilla Eric S. Raymond Edited by The Revenge of the Hackers Chris DiBona, Sam Ockman and Mark Stone OPENSOURCES Voices from the Open Source Revolution Edited by Chris DiBona, Sam Ockman and Mark Stone Copyright “Free Software” is Copyright c ; 1998 Richard M. Stallman Verbatim copying and duplication is permitted in any medium provided this notice is preserved. “A Brief History of Hackerdom” and “Revenge of the Hackers” are Copyright c ; 1998 Eric S. Raymond. These essays are free; you can redistribute them and/or modify them under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. These essays are distributed in the hope that they will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    [Show full text]
  • Linux Symposium 2007 As Shown by the Many Related Presentations at This Confer - Ence (E.G., KVM, Lguest, Vserver)
    Warren Henson of Google asked about other plans for For filesystems, Jon observed that disks are getting larger long-term storage and backup. Jepson said that that but not faster, so fsck time can be a problem. New filesys - sounds like a great thing for Google to do. Right now they tems such as chunkfs and tilefs are more scalable and sub - are stuck with the server (a low-power device, sealed with divide a disk so that only the active part needs to be fsck’d. a hard disk) and aren’t currently addressing that problem, The btrfs filesystem is extent-based, with subvolumes. It although Google has provided gmail accounts. In response supports snapshot checksumming, online fsck, and faster to Henson’s mention of alternative projects from other or - fsck. Jon talked about ext4 with its 48-bit block numbers ganizations, Jepson said that they would like to work with and use of extents. [Editor’s note: Also see the article in these groups and try every week. When these efforts fail, the June 2007 issue of ;login: about ext4.] the kids lose, in her opinion. Since Jepson spoke, Intel has Jon finds reiser4 interesting, but the project is unfortu - announced that they plan to work with OLPC, and Intel is nately stalled because Hans Reiser is no longer able to now listed as a supporter on the laptop.org site. work on it. It needs a new champion. Jon talked about virtualization. It is getting more attention, Linux Symposium 2007 as shown by the many related presentations at this confer - ence (e.g., KVM, lguest, Vserver).
    [Show full text]
  • Licence Agreement Supplement
    Licence Agreement Supplement 2 Index The ISC License ............................................ 300 Unicode License ........................................... 301 Contents X11 License.................................................. 302 Overview .......................................................... 3 Zlib License .................................................. 302 Note ................................................................. 3 Academic Free License 2.1 .............................. 4 Apache License, Version 2.0 ............................ 7 Beerware License ........................................... 10 Boost Software License 1.0 ........................... 10 BSD 2-clause .................................................. 11 BSD 3-clause .................................................. 17 BSD 4-Clause ................................................. 25 BSD variants................................................... 26 Bzip2 License ................................................. 26 Coffee-ware License ...................................... 27 Copyleft-next License .................................... 27 Curl License ................................................... 31 dhcp License .................................................. 32 Dropbear License ........................................... 33 expat License ................................................. 35 GNU GPL v 1.0 ............................................... 36 GNU GPL v 2.0 ............................................... 40 GNU GPL 3.0 ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Solution in Search of a Problem†
    EVANS-REDDY 5-17TYPE.DOC 6/2/03 1:22 PM GOVERNMENT PREFERENCES FOR PROMOTING OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE: A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM† David S. Evans* Bernard J. Reddy** Cite as: David S. Evans and Bernard J. Reddy, Government Preferences for Promoting Open-Source Software: A Solution in Search of a Problem, 9 Mich. Telecomm. Tech. L. Rev. 313 (2003), available at http://www.mttlr.org/volnine/evans.pdf Part I. Introduction .................................................................................. 315 Part II. Software Design and Intellectual Property Protection........................................................................ 318 Part III. The Economics of Commercial Software............................. 324 A. Overview of the Commercial Software Business....................... 324 B. Production Method...................................................................... 327 C. Commercial Business Model and Nature of Competition................................................................. 329 1. Performance of Commercial Software ............................... 331 2. Lessons from the Vertical Disintegration of the Computer Industry..................................................... 335 3. Summary............................................................................... 337 Part IV. The Economics of GPL Open-Source Software ................. 337 A. Institutional Arrangements ......................................................... 338 1. Free Software Foundation is the Ideological Heart of the Movement.......................................................
    [Show full text]