Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Mar 2004 16:45:37 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cowlinks v2 |
| |
Hi!
> > Also it should be possible to have file with 2 hardlinks cowlinked > > somewhere, and possibly make more hardlinks of that one... Having > > pointer to another inode in place where direct block pointers normally > > are should be enough (thinking ext2 here). > > Yes. > > > > But sharing data blocks without sharing inodes is too horrible even to > > > contemplate, I suppose. > > > > Why, btw? > > > > Lets say we allocate 4 bits instead of one for block bitmap. Count > > "15" is special, now it means "15 or higher". That means we have to > > "garbage-collect" to free space that used to have more than 15 links, > > but that should not happen too often... > > The garbage collection is what's horrible about it :) > Btw, 15 would be exceeded easily in my home directory.
Well, but chances are that you'll never unlink such files... Leaving garbage collection to fsck would make it rather easy.
> IMHO, an inode whose block pointers points to another, so that whole > files only can be shared, would be fine.
Yes, this is probably way better way to do that. Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?] - 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/
| |