Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 10:31:26 -0500 From: Lou Kamenov <loukamenov@gmail.com> To: richard.kaestner@ycn.com Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mapping [process|socket|...] to Filesystem Message-ID: <76f962c60601050731x7a81bb57k@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200601051002.45590.richard.kaestner@ycn.com> References: <freebsd-fs.200601031949.22484.richard.kaestner@ycn.com> <200601041420.k04EK049049833@lurza.secnetix.de> <76f962c60601041453n1d195cd6s@mail.gmail.com> <200601051002.45590.richard.kaestner@ycn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/01/06, Richard K=E4stner <richard.kaestner@ycn.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 04 January 2006 23:53, Lou Kamenov wrote: > > On 04/01/06, Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> wrote: [..] > you seem to have experience with fuse, Sorry. I haven't tested fuse4bsd thoroughly and I cannot comment, but I've used the original Linux implementation some time ago. > I could imagine, there is any negative impact on > system operation, if connection to the black-box > is flaky, slow, ... ? That depends entirely on your design. Fuse filesystems run in user land. > The least I want to accomplish, is a 'good idea' which renders > the system unstable. Rigorous tests can show that. Fuse4bsd list is probably a more suitable place to discuss this. best, Lou
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?76f962c60601050731x7a81bb57k>