Messages in this thread | | | From | V13 <> | Subject | Re: The argument for fs assistance in handling archives | Date | Thu, 2 Sep 2004 13:27:20 +0300 |
| |
On Thursday 02 September 2004 12:52, Spam wrote: > > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Besides, there are enhancements which are simply compelling. You can > > write a dramatically better performance version control system with a > > much simpler design if the FS is atomic. Our transaction manager > > first draft was written by a version control guy, and he would probably > > be happy to tell you how lack of atomicity other than rename makes > > version control software design hideous. > > Btw, version control for ordinary files would be a great feature. I > think something like it is available through Windows 2000/3 server. > Isn't it called "Shadow Copies". It works over network shares. :) > > It allows you to restore previous versions of the file even if you > delete or overwrite it. > > Features like this do make a good point and helps protecting data - > something that is important IMHO.
I believe you mean something simillar to:
file1.txt;1 file1.txt;2 file1.txt;3 (yeap, it's VMS)
where you'll have to cleanup old versions when you don't need them any more... AFAIK that this is older than HDDs
<<V13>> - 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/
| |