From: Rick Moen (rick at domain linuxmafia.com)
Date: Sat 14 Sep 2002 - 19:40:29 IST
Quoting Colm MacC?rthaigh (colmmacc at domain redbrick.dcu.ie):
> I took a look at the snapfs code, it's a terrible approach, they
> basically re-implement the VFS code as a VFS. You mount
> a snapshoted filesystem as snapfs, which takes all of the calls
> and then "proxies" them to the real fs.
You're right; that's an approach that deserved to die.
> For snapshots to work, it needs to be on the roadmap for the kernel
> and the VFS needs to be modified so that it can fire off the incremental
> data somewhere else.
Pretty much. Good analysis.
-- Cheers, "This is mad, egotistical, sick, twisted, and stretches the bounds of Rick Moen good taste right off the tongue, past the uvula, and down around rick at domain linuxmafia.com the duodenum. It has other merits, but that should indicate positive interest." -- The Cube, http://www.forum3000.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:18:52 GMT