On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 03:57:18AM +0900, J. R. Okajima wrote: > > Al Viro: > > The trouble with such mechanisms is that they tend to end up depending on > > fairly non-trivial properties of underlying fs. Try aufs one on btrfs, > > see how soon you spot the problem. It's nice when a method turns out > > to be really redundant and implementable in uniform way via other methods > > present; see fh_to_dentry history for example of situation where it hadn't... > > Hmm, I could not see problem around aufs using btrfs as the upper RW > branch, tested on linux-3.9-rc2. > Would you describe more specifically? Sure - btrfs happens to have an interesting limit on the number of links to the same object located in one directory. The thing is, you are trying to retrofit a new primitive into many filesystems and do it in the same way. Doesn't work well... And yes, it is an independent primitive. What I really don't understand is WTF is so attractive about not having to touch individual filesystems; it's not particulary hard to do for any fs we might care about... -- 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
