hooanon05@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow:
>> > 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.
> :::
>> 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).
>
> Agreed.
> While Miklos seems to dislike the inum table, it is necessary I think.
>
>
> J. R. Okajima
Only if you want to fully support hardlinks. Do you know of anything
that really needs true hardlinks?
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
