Talk:COMP 3000 Essay 1 2010 Question 9: Difference between revisions

From Soma-notes
← Older editNewer edit →
Lmundt (talk | contribs)
259 edits
Naseido (talk | contribs)
62 edits
Line 19: Line 19:


Azemanci: Currently working on Section Three Current File Systems.
Azemanci: Currently working on Section Three Current File Systems.
Nisrin (naseido): Working on intro, conclusion and editing
KEY ISSUE: We need a thesis statement. Please suggest ideas.


== Deadline ==
== Deadline ==

Revision as of 00:24, 15 October 2010

Contacts / If interested

Tawfic : tfatah@gmail.com

Andy Zemancik: andy.zemancik@gmail.com

Lester Mundt: lmundt@gmail.com

Matthew Chou : mateh.cc@gmail.com (this is mchou2)

Nisrin Abou-Seido: naseido@connect.carleton.ca

Suggested References Format

Author, publisher/university, Name of the article

Who is doing what

Suggestion: In order to avoid duplication. Please state what section/item you're currently working on.

Tawfic : Currently working on Section One ZFS.

Azemanci: Currently working on Section Three Current File Systems.

Nisrin (naseido): Working on intro, conclusion and editing

KEY ISSUE: We need a thesis statement. Please suggest ideas.

Deadline

Suggestion: Adding content should stop on Thursday, October 14'th at 3:00 PM. Any work after that should go into formatting, spelling, and grammar checking.

--Lmundt 15:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC) - I will definitely be adding content after this time probably late, late into the evening.

--Tafatah 19:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC) No problem. Forget about the suggested deadline. I thought we'd have to be done by 11:00Pm. I am still adding stuff myself. I think Anil will lock the Wiki around 7:00 Am or so. So anytime before that is Ok.

Essay Format Take 2

Hello. I am suggesting the following format instead. If you agree, I'll take care of merging the existing info into this new format. My feeling is that this format is more flexible and will (hopefully) allow individuals to take a section or a sub-section and work on it.

  • Abstract
TO-DO: Main point. Current File Systems are neither versatile enough nor intelligent to handle the rapidly
growing needs of dynamic storage.

TO-DO: few statements regarding the WHYS as to the need for versatile storage (e.g. cloud computing, mobile environments, shifting consumer
demand . . etc )

TO-DO: few statements regarding the need for intelligence (just statements, the body will take care of expanding on these ). E.g. more
intelligent FS’s can include Metadata to help crime investigators, smart FS’s could be self healing . . .etc.
  • Traditional File Systems
    • Characteristics
    • Limitations
  • Zettabyte File System
    • Characteristics
    • Dissected
TO-DO: List the seven components of ZFS and basically what makes a ZFS
E.g. interface, various parts, and external needed libraries . . etc.
    • Features Beyond Traditional File Systems
    • Possible Real-Life Scenarios / Examples
TO-DO: 2-3 examples where ZFS was/could/is being considered for use.

TO-DO : One to two paragraphs stressing / reiterating the main points made in the abstract
        thesis statement).
  • Alternatives to ZFS
one example is good enough.
TO-DO: a brief description of the alternative.
Main argument for it’s viability.
    • Pros/Cons
TO-DO: just a list of pluses and minuses

TO-DO : two to three paragraphs summarizing (this is the conclusion) the main points outlined in the abstract and the body, restating why traditional
FS’s are no longer viable, and  stressing once more that ZFS is a valid alternative.

Essay Format

I started working on the main page. The bullets are to be expanded. Other group are are working in their respective discussion pages but I think it's all right to put our work in progress on the front page. Thoughts?--Lmundt 16:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Gbint 02:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC) Lmundt; what do you think of listing the capacities of the file system under major features? I was thinking that we could overview the features in brief, then delve into each one individually.
  • --Lmundt 14:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC) I was thinking about the major structure... I like what your suggesting in one section. So here is the structure I am thinking of.
  • Intro
  • Section One ZFS
    • Major feature 1
    • Major feature 2
    • Major feature 3
  • Section Two Legacy File Systems
    • Legacy File System1( FAT32 ) - what it does
    • Legacy File System2( ext2 ) - what it does
    • Contrast them with ZFS
  • Section Three Current File Systems
    • NTFS?
    • ext4?
    • Contrast them with ZFS
  • Section Four future file Systems
    • BTRFS
    • WinFS or ??
    • Contrast them with ZFS
  • Conclusion

What does everyone think of this format? While everyone should contribute to section one we could divvy up the rest.

Gbint 16:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC) The layout looks good; I filled out the data dedup section. I think it has reasonable coverage while staying away from becoming it's own essay just on deduplication.

The legacy file systems are really not even in the same world as ZFS, so I think the contrasting section should cover a lot of how storage needs have changed.

The current file systems are capable of being expanded into large pools of storage with good redundancy and even advanced features like data deduplication, but they are only a component in a chain of tools (like ext4 + lvm + mdraid + opendedup) rather than an full end-to-end solution.

--Lmundt 23:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC) The section on deduplication looks good I agree it looks like the right amount of coverage for a portion of a single section. Your also right about the old file systems not being able to hold a candle to ZFS and the conclusion section should talk about how storage needs and computers changed. And intro to that section could set the stage for that period as well. Non-multi-threaded, single processor system with much smaller RAM, even the applications were radically different the Internet was just single webpages without the high performance needs of web commerce and online banking for example. I have another assignment so won't be contributing too much until Monday.

--Tafatah 23:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC) Please take a look at suggested essay format #2 and let me know soon. Time is running out Gents and Ladies :)

--Lmundt 15:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC) I think I prefer the outline I proposed only because it's a very regimented contrast/compare essay format and should get us any marks for format. Most proper essays don't usually have a dedicated pros cons list. Heading more towards a report format I think. It's really what everyone agrees on. I won't be touching the essay until tomorrow though.

--Azemanci 17:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC) I like Lmundt's outline. How would you like to divide up the work? Also can everyone post the contact information so we know exactly who is in our group.

--Tafatah 19:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC) No problem, I'll go with the current format. One issue to keep in mind is that this is an essay, not a report. I.E. the intro/thesis has to include a reasonable suggestion towards using ZFS as a reliable FS. The body and the conclusion would have to assert that. The current format satisfies that if we keep these points in mind. I started looking into the "dissect subsection" in the format I suggested, which is related to the ZFS features section one in the current format. I'll continue to look into that part (above section, who is doing what will be updated accordingly), i.e. I'll take care of section one since I've already done some work on it. I suggest that each member of the group picks two items from one of the other sections, except the contrasting part. Content in section one can then be used to finalize the comparisons in each of sections 2-4. The Intro/Abstract and conclusion sections can be left to the end, and can be done collaboratively. I.E. once we have a very clear picture of all the different pieces.

--Azemanci 03:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC) I will begin working on section three current File Systems unless someone else has already begun working on it.

--Mchou2 20:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC) I am going to start researching for section 2.

--Azemanci 03:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC) Alright so all the sections are being taken care of so we should be good to go for Thursday.

--Tafatah 04:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC) No one is assigned to section four ? Also, for those who haven't picked any section or subsection, please help out with the sections you're more familiar with.

Finally, if you were in class today (well, technically yesterday), then you've heard Anil talk about plagiarism. I know this is common knowledge, so forgive the annoying reminder. Please never copy and paste, and make sure to cite your info. As Anil mentioned, if anyone plagiarises, we are ALL responsible. It is simply impossible for the rest of the group to check whether every member's sentence is genuine or not. So use your own words/phrases ( doesn't have to be fancy or sophisticated ). If you're not sure, please check with the rest of the group.

Good luck, and good night. --Tawfic

--Azemanci 14:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC) My bad I misread something I thought you were doing current file systems section 3. I'll take section 3 but then someone needs to do section 4. There are 4 of us so this should not be a problem.

--Naseido 13 October 2010 Sorry I haven't contributed till now. The outline looks great and I think we can spend most of the day tomorrow editing to make sure all the sections fit together like an essay. I'll be doing section 4.

--Tafatah 16:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC) Hi. In section 4 the most important one is BTRFS. More info on that and less info on the others is Ok.

--Mchou2 03:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC) I have done what I can for the legacy file systems, if someone who doesn't have any particular job wouldn't mind going over it and correcting any errors they see. I am also not familiar with how to edit/format these wiki pages so I tried my best and if you want to change the layout then please do, I would assume after we complete our sections and collaborate them into 1 essay that the formatting will change. I simply put headings on each section just so it is easier to read.

--Tafatah 04:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC) A reference for wiki editing http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing

--Azemanci 18:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC) I'm not going to have my info posted by 3:00. Also how and where are we supposed to cite our sources?

--Tafatah 19:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC) No worries. You have till 7:00 Am ( or till Anil locks the Wiki down, though I wouldn't count on more than 7) Friday, Oct 15. For citing, I am using this convention. Bla.....Bla [Z1. P3] means I am using info from page 3 of article labeled as Z1 in references section.

--Lmundt 20:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC) Citation reference looks good. I think in each section we should talk about the motivation behind the design. A small into for each section. For example in the legacy area fat32 and ext, we could talk about computing becoming commonplace for the average worker so most development was for single users with a relatively small hardrive, not too many files. It will in-turn lead to justify/explanation for the design decission for each vintage of OS. The main intro should about the motivations behind the design. Intended for servers with a focus or expandability, reliability and self maintenance. This is the motivation behind all those cool features we are detailing.

Sources

Not from your group. Found a file which goes to the heart of your problem [http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/overview/zfs-14990 2.pdf ZFSDatasheet] Gautam 22:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks will take a look at that.--Lmundt 16:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


Gbint 01:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC) paper from Sun engineers explaining why they came to build ZFS, the problems they wanted to solve:

Excellent article.Lmundt 14:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Not too exciting but it looks like an easy read http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2008/03/past-present-future-file-systems.ars Lmundt 14:40, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

the wikipedia comparison has some good tables, and if you click the various categories you can learn quite a bit about the various important features //not your group. Rift 18:56, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not from your group but I found this slideshow that was really handy in the assignment! http://www.slideshare.net/Clogeny/zfs-the-last-word-in-filesystems - nshires


Hey there. I'm not a member of your group. But you guys might want to look at this Wiki-page from the SolarisInternals website. I used it today for our assignment, a lot of interesting and in-depth breakdown of the ZFS file system: http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Best_Practices_Guide#ZFS_Performance_Considerations

-- Munther

--Mchou2 03:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC) Good intro to understanding FAT FS http://www-ssdp.dee.fct.unl.pt/leec/micro/20042005/teorica/Introduction_to_FAT.pdf

--Azemanci 18:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC) Abit late but I found a comparison of current file systems including ZFS: http://www.idt.mdh.se/kurser/ct3340/ht09/ADMINISTRATION/IRCSE09-submissions/ircse09_submission_16.pdf

http://www.dhtusa.com/media/IOPerf_CMG09DHT.pdf

Retrieved from "https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:COMP_3000_Essay_1_2010_Question_9&oldid=4276"