lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [rfc git patch] union directory
    In message <20081128161921.GA3843@in.ibm.com>, Bharata B Rao writes:
    > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:01:32PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
    > > I've been doing some small fixing/cleanup work on the union directory
    > > patches by Jan, and just noticed there's a thread about the union
    > > mounts on LKML, so I thought publicizing won't hurt.
    >
    > Interesting that you call it "union directory", do you have plans to go
    > the Plan 9's way of union directories ?
    >
    > >
    > > It's still a work in progress, notably the readdir code currently only
    > > works on a few specific filesystem types.
    >
    > readdir was one of the things on which we couldn't reach a consensus
    > on how to do it the right way. We were suggested that we move the
    > duplicate elimination into user space and an effort towards this was
    > also done (Ref: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/29/248) by moving this
    > to glibc readdir. But we weren't sure how this could work for NFS and
    > were told that it is required to get the NFS side of things
    > sorted out first. So that's where readdir effort stands now afaik.
    > Do you have any ideas/plans on this front ?
    >
    > Also the last development activity that I am aware of was done towards
    > getting a generic whiteout support. David Woodhouse started a git tree
    > at one point of time for whiteout support
    > (git://git.infradead.org/union/whiteout-2.6.git). Erez Zodak was
    > infact looking forward for these changes to make use of them in Unionfs,
    > but even this effort died down.

    We've actually been (quietly) looking into these whiteout patches for a
    couple of months already. We found that those patches were not yet suitable
    for intergration into a f/s such as unionfs. We found (and fixed) some
    bugs, and had to change the API somewhat and its implementation. I think
    the only way to be sure that these patches work well is to have a user for
    them. We plan on re-posting our modified patches once we've done a lot more
    testing with them in the context of unionfs.

    > Nice to know that you have started looking into Union Mount patches.
    > Would be interesting to know/understand your plans/thoughts on taking
    > this effort forward.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Bharata.
    > --
    > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
    > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

    Erez.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-12-01 18:21    [W:0.026 / U:59.636 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site