Re: How would a relational operating system look like?

Are domains variable in a relational operating system?

"Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1180773081.705066.14270_at_p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> Lately, I came to put a version of Microsoft Vista on my desktop. As
> I am accustomed to with Microsoft OS's, I am bracing for the impact of
> how much extra RAM will be consumed when adopting a new generation of
> OS to make it function prperly. For Vista, I found out it is a
> nightmare! To make the usual applications I use (mainly
> administration tools), no less than 4Gb of RAM are required to avoid
> the screen *hanging on*/reeze effect one gets when openning several
> applications simultaneously. As a result I went back to XP Pro more
> and more despaired by the utter unefficiency of current OS and
> Environments. Convinced that a perfect OS is nothing else than a
> relational OS, I kept dreaming about building one someday.
>
> Based on previous works such OS would probably have the following
> requirements:
>
>> The primary need for reaching independence between the physical and
>> logical layer would impose the creation of a new filesystem
>> The above filesystem would exclude a hierarchical *physical* organisation
>> of the data: among other characteristics, the physical organisation would
>> prohibit the use of indexes and other pointless trickery.
>> The above filesystem would exclude a hierarchical *logical* organisation
>> of the data: the system would allow the manipulation and creation of
>> views/schema that would present data under a form that could be later
>> server as a data source for a presentation widget.
>> The above filesystem would not promote a hierarchical *user view* of the
>> data. Some built-in *keyword resource view* (for a lack of a better
>> word) widgets would be directly bound to logical views that user may
>> define according to his/her needs....The concept of directory and file
>> accessible to the user would be unexisting because the system would allow
>> the user to express views of resources (which may be files) based solely
>> on area of interest or keyword like views of the data.
>
> So I started looking around for *filesystems* and found out the
> mainstream latest trends: ext4, ext3...After doing some googling , I
> realize these new trends are simply hypes as none of the material read
> seems convincing. So I had this crazy idea : what about a relational
> filesystem based on Linux Kernel: something we could cal REL-UX that
> could be open to public as a free distribution? Any comments ideas?
> How would you think a system such as REL-UX look like.(additionally to
> the provided comments)? What would be its characteristics ?
> Is anybody interested in working on that ?
>
> Regards...
>
Received on Mon Jun 04 2007 - 04:57:37 CEST