Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:40:05 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.2.11pre2 proposed patch |
| |
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> > You are dealing with inherently sucking filesystem. Sorry. There > >is *no* out-of-directory metadata and thus there is no persistent inodes. > > If you are willing to accept the still-not-ideal constraint > that the inode number stays constant so long as only Linux (or, in any > case, another system employing the same algorithm) performs directory
D'oh! If only Linux does it - WTFPoint of using FAT? Exercise in masochism?
> operations on the filesystem in questions, you might implement an > auxiliary file that holds persistent inode mappings.
... and face additional shitload of races due to the fact that we have an extra file to modify. And additional slowdown. Great.
> The natural place to put the inode map would be on the same > underlying FAT filesystem, but for extra brownie points you could > perhaps arrange for it to be located on a different filesystem. To > protect against external meddling (e.g., renaming a file with > Ms. Windows), the persistent inode map should contain checksums of > the VFAT filesystem's underlying directory pages.
> This is piling cruft upon cruft, but it could be made to work > under the given constraint. It could even be yet another layered > filesystem (PVFAT?) in the towering FAT ensemble. Future generations > will not thank you, though.
Me? No, sir. DIY if you want. I'll pass.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |