Cron as a filesystem
blog.gopheracademy.com
blog.gopheracademy.com
As it is, we've got a lot of reinvention of ideas happening, often without much forward movement.
The "everything is a file and files have no locking" mentality of UNIX doesn't scale well to continuously running systems.
Why a database?
"The "everything is a file and files have no locking" mentality of UNIX doesn't scale well to continuously running systems."
I don't understand what argument you're making here. UNIX doesn't actually have "everything is a file" semantics (cron does not, for example, in the sense proposed by the article). Plan 9 mostly does, and it's actually kind of awesome. What part of Plan 9's semantics of everything is a network-transparent file "doesn't scale"? And, what do you mean by "doesn't scale"?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I genuinely don't understand what you're suggesting instead. What is an alternative cron implementation that is implemented as a database that "scales" better than something like this, by your definition? And, what is "scale" in this context?
One condition for a scalable system is a network interface imho.
Cron doesn't have that as well, which usually leads to application level complexity to avoid running the same cron on multiple machines.
If that wasn't good enough, then /etc/a and /etc/b could be virtual files served by the same daemon. This could look for change sets written to /dev/patch, and block reads and writes while it applied them.