Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:45:53 -0500
From:      "Charles P. Wright" <cwright@cs.sunysb.edu>
To:        Lou Kamenov <loukamenov@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: the current status of nullfs, unionfs
Message-ID:  <1110476753.20632.11.camel@polarbear.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
In-Reply-To: <76f962c6050310092461fc850@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <200503091838.06322.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20050310023518.GA11712@VARK.MIT.EDU> <20050310113843.GJ34822@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050310141910.GA72868@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <76f962c6050310092461fc850@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 12:24 -0500, Lou Kamenov wrote:
> Erez's unionfs has the same problem, the case there is that you wont be able to
> unmount it at all. (At least last time I tried with 1.0.3)
The code has improved quite a bit since then.  We've ironed out most of
of the big bugs (there are still other smaller ones to go, but we are
making reasonable progress).  A recent version has been included in
Knoppix 3.8.

> Problem or not it could be easily solved with simple heuristics.
> Building a filespace
> with unioning shouldnt really  be that hard.
That isn't quite true.  In theory, all you have to do is repeat some
operations over many branches.  In practice, building a Unioning file
system is not an easy task.  There are very many corner cases to deal
with, and what were previously atomic VFS ops can require many
operations.  

Charles



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1110476753.20632.11.camel>