The overview doc says the data source can be other than a file. A camera or 
twitter feed for example. What seems to be missing is the namespace splicing 
(no bind or mount). There is also some talk of IoT sources.

Need to think through this but conceptually I don't see a problem adding this 
9p feature back within the same architecture.... A thought experiment worth 

Even for serving named live data decoupling data source/sink from naming can 
have value. You should even be able to use a name to take advantage of an 
underlying CDN! Or a content tree ala Usenet. E.g. Not all data is directly 
served from your camera but from a content delivery network so scaling is not 
an issue.

But I need to first read and understand what all they've done!

> On Feb 23, 2017, at 1:00 AM, Charles Forsyth <> 
> wrote:
> I don't think it's a reworking of 9P.
> It's closer to an older style of distributed file system, closer to Amoeba's 
> or the Cambridge Distributed System,
> and using full-content storage operations on content accessed through a 
> separate and global name service.
> 9P (and relatives) allow a huge assortment of surprisingly different service 
> types to be represented and accessed in a uniform way,
> where conventional file storage is easily the least interesting service.
> (That isn't a criticism: both this and 9P-like things have their place.)

Reply via email to