On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:43:38 +1100, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Oh, so making some set of random user changes to random user data > have ACID properties? That's what databases are for, isn't it? :P Yep :) > I dont see us implementing anything like this in XFS anytime soon. > We are looking to add transaction grouping so that we can make > things that currently require multiple transactions (e.g. create a > file, add a default ACL) atomic, but I don't have any plans to > open the can of worms that is userspace controlled transactions any > time soon. The worst part is working out the semantics as to not break existing apps (without completely sacrificing concurrency). > We already have this upgrade rollback functionality in development > with none of that complexity - it uses filesystem snapshots so is > effectively filesystem independent and already works with yum and > btrfs. You don't need any special application support for this - > rollback from a failed upgrade is as simple as a reboot. The downside being you also roll back your logs and any other changes made during that time. On the whole though, it's probably sufficient. > Sure, Microsoft have been trying to make their filesystem a database > for years. It's theoretically possible, but in practice they've > fallen short in every attempt in the past 15 years. err... try 20 years :) It's funny in a way, sqlite succeeds at effectively doing this for an awful large number of applications. -- Stewart Smith _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
