[Info-vax] HP wins Oracle Itanium case

[ChrisQ]

On 08/23/12 00:45, Howard S Shubs wrote:
> In article<zCQYr.12412$7h.10088 at fx23.am4>, ChrisQ<meru at devnull.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you could answer the question: Why RMS and on disk structure
>> was built into the filesystem at the time, to understand why it may
>> not be so relevant now.
>
> Directory trees are still relevant.  File structure *can* be relevant.
>

I was just interested in why such a scheme was designed. At the time, the
world of computing was proprietary, with little standardisation and
manufacturers were free to design systems as they saw fit. The only
reason that I can see for DEC to have built RMS capability into the file 
system
was because it eased computing and memory requirements elsewhere, and / or
that that they had applications in mind that needed the functionality.

Bearing in mind that cpu throughput, memory sizes and disk latency would
have been limiting, it would make sense to have a single copy of the code to
do the work, rather than a copy in every application that needed it.

I'm not sure that logic would make so much sense now...

Regards,

Chris