SQLite Forum



(1) By anonymous on 2020-09-01 17:58:57 [source]

if 'vfs' stands for 'virtual file system', can that phrase be added somewhere on https://www.sqlite.org/vfs.html?

googling 'vfs' doesn't point to it being a common initialism.

(2) By Keith Medcalf (kmedcalf) on 2020-09-01 18:08:03 in reply to 1 [link] [source]

VFS has been in common usage as Virtual File System since the 1970's, if not before.

(3) By Warren Young (wyoung) on 2020-09-01 19:55:27 in reply to 2 [link] [source]

There's a VFS layer in pretty much every commercially viable *ix OS today via Unix, plus many other FOSS projects with file system abstraction features:

(4) By John McMahon (jmcm54ac) on 2020-09-02 12:30:23 in reply to 1 [link] [source]

I second this and suggest the following change to para 1

from: This article describes the SQLite OS portability layer or "VFS" - the module

to: This article describes the SQLite OS portability layer or "VFS" (Virtual File System) - the module

Not everyone comes to SQLite with the programming and database background of Keith and Warren. This is just the expansion of what seems to be a common industry abbreviation.


(5) By David Jones (vman59) on 2020-09-02 18:05:44 in reply to 4 [link] [source]

The VFS object in SQLite has a broader scope than the *ix usage of VFS. I'd rather it had been called something along the lines of Virtual Operating Environment (VOE) or System Interfaces Translator (SIT). Too late now.

(6) By Scott Robison (casaderobison) on 2020-09-03 00:19:23 in reply to 5 [link] [source]

Virtual File System could be renamed to some other name that resolves to the same TLA. "Virtual Function Structure" (since the VFS is a structure of function pointers) could be one.

As I understand it, the SQLite VFS was originally just a way to define the file system interface in an abstract manner. Only later did it take on non-FS apis.

Or it could be left alone. Just a thought.