From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Mar  3 12:58:54 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4039F37B6D2
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri,  3 Mar 2000 12:58:49 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com)
Received: from shell-1.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-1.enteract.com [207.229.143.40])
	by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA20095;
	Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:58:46 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com)
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:58:46 -0600 (CST)
From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com>
To: Michael Bacarella <mbac@nyct.net>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Copy-on-write filesystem
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003031338080.1135-100000@bsd1.nyct.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96.1000303145335.55794B-100000@shell-1.enteract.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Michael Bacarella wrote:

> 
> 
> Upon reading of Microsoft's fabulous innovations in the filesystem arena,
> I started playing with some ideas of my own (not to be confused with
> ORIGINAL ideas)
> 
> Can someone tell me why copy-on-write filesystems would be bad?

It wouldn't be.  This is how NetApp do their .snapshot direcotries.  I think
they have some white papers on it on their website.  It's very handy.


David



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message