Hi Amir, Miklos, On 20/03/18 14:29, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > And I do appreciate the time you've put into understanding the overlayfs > problem and explaining the problems with my current proposal. > For a while now I've been wondering why overlayfs is keen to avoid using a local, persistent, inode number mapping cache? Sure there can be subtle problems with them but there are problems with other alternatives too. Ian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
