Messages in this thread | | | From | Rob Landley <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT PATCH COW] proof of concept impementation of cowlinks | Date | Wed, 12 May 2004 15:29:24 -0500 |
| |
On Sunday 09 May 2004 16:53, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I don't know how to handle this now. Introducing cow-inode number > > with semantic "cowino1==cowino2 => files are cowlinked" is > > ugly and won't deal with per-block cow. Sooner or later someone > > will want to have per block cow. Think about cow'ing multi-gigabyte > > database files for checkpointing/backup purposes... > > Well, if only block 17 is cowlink-shared between two files, I guess > userspace does not want to know... And I think that cow-inode number > *can* handle all other cases.
I remember somebody had a toy to find out the file block ranges (on ext2/ext3 anyway), which could detect fragmentation and holes and such. Presumably, whatever they did would already detect per-block cowlinks, if anybody actually cared...
Rob
- 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/
| |