11–20 of 188 posts
> But it does not have to be this way. If a database engine is implemented as a core system service, along with simple tools to browse and modify database records, the gordian knot of system configuration files disappears. MacOS comes very close to this ideal, with ResEdit as this universal database editor. Or AS/400, which is more or less a SQL database.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually Microsoft tried this idea themselves with WinFS. It was planned for Vista but eventually the project was stopped because it was too much effort. I could imagine this to be really useful if it was possible to add arbitrary custom attributes.
Does anyone have the story on why this project was actually halted? It reportedly sounded like it would have been a giant leap at the time, had it actually landed.
There's no sense storing videos, baby photos and "quarterly report new (2) backup newest 08.2019_john.xlsx" in a database.
My ultimate OS is Linux, but it's rock stable, supports all hardware and runs OSX and Windows software natively. Heh
With that being said, my ultimate distro is Linux with a Desktop Environment that is less braindead than Gnome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does anyone have the story on why this project was actually halted? It reportedly sounded like it would have been a giant leap at the time, had it actually landed.
Probably because it was a dumb idea. There's no sense storing videos, baby photos and "quarterly report new (2) backup newest 08.2019_john.xlsx" in a database.
I was looking forward to seeing it in action based on reports of what it was.
Windows sorta does that with the Registry but A) the registry isn't the filesystem, B) the registry is a filesystem on top of NTFS and C) the registry sucks.
If the Registry had the power of,say, PostgreSQL to back it up, it would suck a lot less. Of course, for large files, you should still be able to rely on more conventional filesystems as well as for backwards compat.
My ultimate OS is Linux, but it's rock stable, supports all hardware and runs OSX and Windows software natively. Heh
I'm currently trying to figure out how to properly drive a 4K monitor with my laptop and not have it end up lagging. Supposedly hardware acceleration is enabled on Firefox, but even trying to play even a 1080p YouTube video drops frames. On Windows it is buttery smooth, so it's not a hardware issue. Don't even get me started about scaling...
(Currently using GNOME on Wayland)
> But it does not have to be this way. If a database engine is implemented as a core system service, along with simple tools to browse and modify database records, the gordian knot of system configuration files disappears. MacOS comes very close to this ideal, with ResEdit as this universal database editor. Or AS/400, which is more or less a SQL database.
People keep on saying that, but how really true is it? Many operating systems come with bundled relational databases–e.g. most Linux distributions come with more than one relational database implementation bundled. Does that make Linux "more or less a SQL database"? How deeply integrated is DB2/400 into the OS/400 kernel (or equivalent term, such as "System Licensed Internal Code")? There is a paucity of public information about the actual nature or depth of this integration.
I think an OS with a truly deeply integrated SQL database would expose things like a table/view of all files in the filesystem, a view of running OS processes, etc. As far as I am aware, OS/400 (or "IBM i" as they are calling it nowadays), doesn't have any such features.