Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 3 Jul 2005 15:50:10 +0200 | From | Frank van Maarseveen <> | Subject | Re: FUSE merging? |
| |
On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 03:24:04PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > Hmm, do you mean returning different directory contents based on uid? > > > > http://clusternfs.sourceforge.net > > > > Don't ask me how this plays with the dcache. > > But here the decision on what to return is in the _server_.
It still means that name space invariancy cannot be guaranteed.
> There's > nothing magic about that. It's as if it was N different servers for N > different clients, only more effective.
Not entirely, there is a UID dependancy.
> I think what you call namespace invariance is basically true for all > existing filesystems. There could be a filesystem which returns > different directory contents based on whatever it wants, but it can't > return a different "dentry" for the same name.
This is not what I mean. The directory contents itself must be identical for every user. And every name must of course correspond with only one dentry. That's name-space invariance IMO.
> > IMHO The namespace argument against FUSE is weak for multiple reasons. The > > only variancy I see is when crossing the mount point. And that disappears > > once EACCES is returned when non-ptraceable processes try to cross it. > > Yes, but still this is just a difference in permission, and not a > difference in namespace.
Exactly. And such a difference in permission already exists for (sane) networked file systems such as NFS with "squash_root" in effect on the server.
-- Frank - 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/
| |