lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] cowlinks v2
On Fri, 2 April 2004 20:23:58 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > Then you link()...
>
> INODE123 Usage count = 2, pointer to cowid 567
> COWID 567: Usage count = 3
> INODE124 Usage count = 2, pointer to cowid 567
> INODE125 Usage count = 2, pointer to cowid 567
>
> Now, if I write to any inode with has cowid, data have to be copied,
> and pointer to cowid deleted from that inode .

Ok, you win. Next time I get scare, I should ask you first. :)

In a single picture, links currently look like this:

Symlink can point to inodes or cowlinks or hardlinks
Hardlink can point to inodes or cowlinks
Cowlink can point to inodes

I like it.

Not sure about the current count, but it looks like most people favor
the indirect approach now.

Jörn

--
"Security vulnerabilities are here to stay."
-- Scott Culp, Manager of the Microsoft Security Response Center, 2001
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site