Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garbage Collected Filesystem
Based on a single primary source, poorly written, and misleading. Due to lack of discussion in third-party sources, no criticism is presented. This is exactly why we shouldn't have articles on marginal topics. I'm going to indulge in some of my own crticism here, but adding this to the article would be . The original presentation http://www.madore.org/~david/linux/gcfs/#sec_intro gives (i) hard links to directories, and (ii) background deletion of entire trees as the advantages. Regarding (i), it incorrectly clams that these are not possible in a traditional Unix (read FFS and derivatives) file systems. Actually, hard links to directories are possible in most Unix file systems, but there's no mechanism for preventing loops in the graph. So, in most Unix systems only root can create hard links to directories. GCFS is a complicated mechanism for enabling something useless: loops in the file system. The second claim to novelty (ii), is also not really new (except for doing it on graphs that have loops). Practically all versioning/checkpointing file systems that eventually delete old versions (e.g. Write_Anywhere_File_Layout|WAFL) also have to garbage collect entire trees, except they do this for a much better reason
— User:Pohta, 12:40, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)