From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Jul 12 8:36:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12E3637C003; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 08:36:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id RAA67960; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 17:36:47 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA06417; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 17:36:47 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 17:36:47 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Robert Watson Cc: Kelly Yancey , Dmitry Brodsky , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Meta-Data & stackable FS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > BTW, I think there's a decent argument that even if you had > fully-functional stacking, having the base file store provide EA services > is highly desirable, as it allows layers to impose new semantics and > meta-data without needing to deal with the namespace and storage issues, > and it simplifies the update/consistency problem substantially. I agree. The main point with EAs is to allow future expansion without going through the usual process of figuring out which already over-abused corner of the FS you can kludge a feature into *this* time. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message