From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Jun 19 22:53:18 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from cs.columbia.edu (cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8524E14C4B for ; Sat, 19 Jun 1999 22:53:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu) Received: from shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.18.15]) by cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA26111; Sun, 20 Jun 1999 01:53:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ezk@localhost) by shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA25667; Sun, 20 Jun 1999 01:53:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 01:53:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199906200553.BAA25667@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu: ezk set sender to ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu using -f From: Erez Zadok To: James Pace Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: nullfs? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Jun 1999 13:12:16 PDT." Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org If you want a sorta nullfs that works, see http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research/software/ and get my Wrapfs for freebsd 3.0. It does what nullfs does and more, but uses synchronous writes to work around the VFS deficiencies. It's slower than what nullfs should be, but it works. PS. developer folks, I was hoping these VFS problems were going to be fixed in 4.x, and am disappointed to find out the problems are still there. Erez. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message