OpenBSD Journal

BSDNow Episode 053: It's HAMMER Time

Contributed by jj on from the when will bsdnow serve episodes using http(8) dept.

On the 1 year anniversary episode of BSDNow, Kris and Allan interview OpenBSD's Reyk Flöter (reyk@) about the new httpd(8), in addition to the week's odds and ends in the world of BSD.

[ Video | HD Video | MP3 Audio | OGG Audio | Torrent ]

(Comments are closed)


Comments
  1. By Anonymous Coward (213.161.64.50) on

    Gee - for a brief second, HAMMER had arrived for OpenBSD ...

    Comments
    1. By chronicdiscord (70.51.136.191) on

      > Gee - for a brief second, HAMMER had arrived for OpenBSD ...

      A cool thought, but the amount of work involved in such a thing, it'd be like an up to date pf being on FreeBSD.

      Hell, the last time I read up on DragonFlyBSD, they still were not entirely done making it HAMMER-ified.

    2. By Anonymous Coward (78.192.104.249) on

      > Gee - for a brief second, HAMMER had arrived for OpenBSD ...

      http://www.openbsdfoundation.org/gsoc2014.html#hammer

  2. By Jorden Verwer (217.149.210.16) on

    So, I guess that means there will be no SCGI support in httpd. That's unfortunate, because unlike SOAP (and, arguably, SMTP), SCGI actually *is* simple. I can sort of understand the reasoning behind not implementing two protocols that do nearly the same thing, I just wish a different protocol had been chosen here.

    I'm not sure why slowcgi uses FastCGI instead of SCGI, but that might be part of the explanation, I suppose.

    Comments
    1. By Chris Cappuccio (chriscappuccio) on http://www.nmedia.net/chris/

      > So, I guess that means there will be no SCGI support in httpd. That's unfortunate, because unlike SOAP (and, arguably, SMTP), SCGI actually *is* simple. I can sort of understand the reasoning behind not implementing two protocols that do nearly the same thing, I just wish a different protocol had been chosen here.
      >
      > I'm not sure why slowcgi uses FastCGI instead of SCGI, but that might be part of the explanation, I suppose.

      Probably because everything in the ports tree supports FastCGI, and nobody has ever heard of SCGI. The point is to make it useful.

      Comments
      1. By Jorden Verwer (217.149.210.16) on

        > Probably because everything in the ports tree supports FastCGI, and nobody has ever heard of SCGI. The point is to make it useful.
        Given that nginx (including the version that used to be in base) supports SCGI, I find your argument incredibly unconvincing. It seems more likely that FastCGI was just considered "good enough", without considering all alternatives. If so, I'd say it was unfortunate choice, at least in retrospect.

  3. By Lars Schotte (80.152.30.211) gustik@gustik.eu on http://gustik.eu/

    Of course it would be nice to see HAMMER FS being ported to OpenBSD, but it is not a catastrophe that it is not, because it's not ready yet. HAMMER2 FS will bring the "interesting" stuff. So maybe then it will be worth looking at.
    More importantly I would rather see it first in FreeBSD in competition to ZFS. However, these filesystems are only suitable for computers with a lot of RAM and a lot of disk space. So not really something one would need on his desktop. Server or NAS would be a good place for it.
    I am puzzled how is it possible that we have the "same" UFS on these three (four when counting NetBSD and OpenBSD separately) BSDs and all of them are incompatible to each other. I would love to see some kind of consolidation there too. FreeBSD UFS2 is the best one, so I would love to see that, with all its features like NFSv4 or Posix ACLs, softupdate-journaling, maybe even MAC on all BSDs. Of course I understand that OpenBSD itself does not want to have ACLs because of some political reasons (because they believe that admins are too dumb to use them properly), I do not think that it hurts to have it. Weather it should be enabled per default is another question. It is not even on FreeBSD.
    Back to HAMMER FS I once asked them on IRC if they could imagine having NFSv4 ACL support for HAMMER in DragonFlyBSD, of course someone would need to implement it on DragonFlyBSD fist, and then for HAMMER, because HAMMER is only supported on that BSD, but they were not hostile to this idea, just there is not enough developers with enough time (and money) to do it. Maybe it will come someday.

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]