On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 17:54 -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > Me, personally, I think I'd probably "re-link" the thing, mark it as
> > such, ship it across like a normal file, then unlink it after the
> > restore. I don't know what we'd choose when actually implementing
> it.
>
> Re-linking works well when the file system supports that - some do not
> allow this, in which case you need to silently rename instead of really
> un-linking (even with NFS), or copy the entire contents.
Yeah, it will certainly be fs-dependent.
This might be a good application for splice.
open("/tmp/linked-newfile", O_RDONLY, perms);
splice(unlinked_fd, NULL, new_fd, NULL, MAX_INT, SPLICE_F_MOVE);
I'm not sure if it can re-use the blocks on the fs for this, but it
probably doesn't matter.
-- Dave
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
