hooanon05@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Miklos Szeredi:
>> The most interesting is the directory and metadata deltas, which do
>> make a delta-fs like implementation much more effective and nicer as a
>> dumb union type filesystem. Mind, unionfs and aufs are rapidly
>> acquiring non-union traits, like inode number storage, virtual hard
>> links (not to speak of whiteouts). Which makes them all the more
>> hackish, I much prefer a conceptually clean solution.
>
> I agree that the delta is a good approach. But it is for filedata only.
> As I wrote in another mail, how do you support hardlinks on the lower
> readonly layer?
>
>
> J. R. Okajima
Use a filename -> inode indirection and delta based on inode
numbers. Although the you also have to consider the device id in case
there are multiple filesystem mounted in your read-only branch. So
filename -> (dev, inode).
MfG
Goswin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
