From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dan Cross <cross@math.psu.edu>
Message-Id: <200111090025.TAA19184@augusta.math.psu.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan 9
In-Reply-To: <20011108140245.3ADD6199F2@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Cc:
Date: Thu,  8 Nov 2001 19:25:06 -0500
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1a60c8da-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

In article <20011108140245.3ADD6199F2@mail.cse.psu.edu> you write:
>I take it that you're suggesting that the file system has no structure
>other than being an object repository.  It's up to each user to
>impose order by having his or her own object linkage.
>
>It is indeed an interesting idea.  It seems that sharing views would
>also be desirable since you would need to communicate with others.
>You'ld also have to have some form of persistence of the structural
>information or else run possibly billion line scripts every time
>you connect to the system.  You'ld also need a naming scheme so that
>you could reference the objects for the links.
>
>Sean Quinlan is doing something similar, though only the file storage
>part with a system called venti.  I don't know how much he's released
>about it but I know there's a paper in the works.  Look at
>http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/seanq
>
>I know I've seen something similar before though I can't remember
>where.  The idea there was a sea of objects with multiple views
>that made the interrelation subjective.  I'll see if I can find
>a reference.  Don't hold your breath, I'm getting older by the
>minute.

Doesn't Amoeba basically do this?  Everything is represented as a
(named) object, and there's a mapping from symbolic name to object
ID.  There's nothing inherent in the system that says that the
mapping can't be arbitrary, user driven, etc.

	- Dan C.