On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 02:00:58PM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 10/28/2013 01:49 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > >On Oct 28, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>On Mon, 2013-10-28 at 11:40 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > >>>Then you end up with large directories and an extra name per inode that needs to > >>>be stored and extra lookups for each file when you do a whole file system crawl. > >>> > >>>Certainly not as easy as adding and xattrs with that information :) > >>And I think there's another reason why it wouldn't work... > >> > >>Imagine I change my system to encode what should be XATTRs in hardlink > >>pseudo files... > >> > >>If I have such pair locally e.g. on my ext4: > >>/foo/bar/actual/file > >>/meta/<SHA512 identifier>.2342348324 > >> > >>And now move/copy the file via the network to the archive, I'd have to > >>copy both files (which is really annoying), and I'd guess the inode > >>coupling would get los (and at least the name wouldn't fit anymore). > >> > >>So the whole thing is IMHO not even a workaround. > >OK. So you're going to do XATTRs for us? > > > >Trond > > Now that pNFS is perfect and labeled NFS has made it upstream, I > think that Steve D must be looking for something to keep him busy :) I agree with Trond that we first really need good evidence about exactly who wants this and why. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
