I was under the impression that the storage model in the system/38 was part of what was carried forward into the as400. Not the capability model, as much as the lack of "files" because everything is just persistent objects/segments.
Is that not the case?
But I'm not really sure how this by itself solves the problems of modern SSD's. Problems caused by two things, the differing segment/page sizes between the upper layers (OS/filesystem/database/etc) and the need to rewrite static portions of the SSD in order to wear level the entire address space. (and to a lesser extent the need to update small portions in the middle of existing pieces of data).
Its the second part that seems to be forgotten by lots of people suggesting alternatives to the current storage stack. Whats really necessary is a higher level communications protocol between the flash and the filesystem. One that provides the metadata to the ssd about the sizes of individual "objects" so that they may be keep together as atomic units. That way the flash layer knows if a write is to a larger object, or a new object itself that can be managed separately.
Is that not the case?
But I'm not really sure how this by itself solves the problems of modern SSD's. Problems caused by two things, the differing segment/page sizes between the upper layers (OS/filesystem/database/etc) and the need to rewrite static portions of the SSD in order to wear level the entire address space. (and to a lesser extent the need to update small portions in the middle of existing pieces of data).
Its the second part that seems to be forgotten by lots of people suggesting alternatives to the current storage stack. Whats really necessary is a higher level communications protocol between the flash and the filesystem. One that provides the metadata to the ssd about the sizes of individual "objects" so that they may be keep together as atomic units. That way the flash layer knows if a write is to a larger object, or a new object itself that can be managed separately.