The time has come to replace file systems
Reading this article left me wondering just where the 200 million tags this guy needs are supposed to come from. Manual curation?! Automatically derived by file extension? file headers? what is the cost of opening a file, parsing its filetype, comparing against a reference, writing it to a database, etc. How is that cheaper than current indexers (which all seem to work fine btw)?<p>I rarely waste effort trying to remember filenames in the first place, much less needing some expensive tag curation to locate files. I simply use a bit of discipline organizing the directory structure(s). If I do ever need to actually search for something, it will be constrained to a narrow subset of directories and ignore the other 199.9 million files or whatever.<p>Moreover, I just don&#x27;t have the problem of searching for filename fragments to begin with. Nor do I see a reasonable way to use a whole host of powerful unix techniques with a whackadoodle tiny tags filesystem. Or the need to produce a list of 20 million images in 2 seconds. What use would that be anyway? I&#x27;m not going to read a list like that - I&#x27;m going to operate on it.<p>Please correct me if I&#x27;m wrong, but the versatility of `find` is far more powerful if you actually need to handle&#x2F;sort through that many files, and something like `fzf` probably curtails all these complaints in the first place.