1. An APFS volume's free space doesn't reflect a smaller amount of free space on the underlying disk
2. The diskimages-helper application doesn't report errors when write requests fail to grow the disk image
These are not even complex problems of the new format. It is just Apple forgot to have basic checks. It is like the root access with an empty password incident happened 2 months ago. Why these serious but basic problems happen? What is going on with Apple?
(2) is the real issue here.
According to TFA, HFS+ sparsebundles reflect the limitations of their underlying volume, while APFS sparsebundles do not. Seems clear to me that this is a bug.
If you built a new filesystem, competent software engineers will heavily test the corner cases. What happens when the fs runs out of space? What happens when the metadata store runs out of space? etc.
The original article mentions bugs that are pretty obvious cases to test. What precisely happens when you have a sparsebundle that exceeds the storage capacity of the containing volume? A PM needs to define what should happen and an eng needs to test that it does.
It's inexcusable that things like this aren't tested and is an organizational failure. This isn't some complex interaction of earbuds with watch and a cloud system. This is a very testable filesystem.
These things speak to organizational issues.
Even in the Linux work, thinks like btrfs, even though some distros consider it sable, is still treated with scrutiny. Back in the early 2000s, many Linux distros refused to install on XFS or JFS.
Apple's APFS rollout really does fell like it happened way too fast.
Like Ritchie, I go back to the days of when the Macintosh Operating System shipped on floppies and didn’t have pre-emptive multitasking or memory protection—everything ran in the same memory space. The entire system would crash pretty regularly due to INIT (system extensions) conflicts, for example.
I can count on one hand the number of times my Mac has kernel panicked over the last few years and I regularly run beta versions of macOS.
That’s a very low bar. At least Windows has the excuse of having to work with a bazillion drivers.
No, he quoted Sinofsky because he’s one of the few people in the world who understands what it’s like trying to operate at this scale, since he was at Microsoft during it’s heyday.
Corner cases that affect only .01 percent of the installed bases aren’t a big deal when you’re operating at a few million; it’s entirely different when it’s more than a billion devices.
A common issue with Apple lately.