From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Mayrhuber Subject: Re: [PATCH] "metas" in reiserfs v4 snapshot 2004.03.26 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 19:14:25 +0200 Message-ID: <200404011914.25900.christian.mayrhuber@gmx.net> References: <20040401163120.98834.qmail@web25006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200404011837.57924.chrivers@iversen-net.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <200404011837.57924.chrivers@iversen-net.dk> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com On Thursday 01 April 2004 18:37, Christian Iversen wrote: > On Thursday 01 April 2004 18:31, Narcoleptic Electron wrote: > > If there are other approaches not addressed here, or > > clarification required, please feel free to revise > > this list. > > I think someone suggested putting meta file information in /proc. > > So. Is this a bad idea? I think not. > > In this scheme, /some/file would have /proc/metas/some/file/* as meta > information. Reiser4 would have to mimic the device structure in /proc. If someone wants to access meta information he would have to lookup the device of his filesystem. What about nfs? This is not compatible, nor comfortable. > > This reduces the risk of conflict to 0. > > One other idea I have, is "...". That way, > > dir/. is the directory itself > dir/.. is the parent > and > dir/... is the meta info. Really elegant! Not perfect, tough - it is not descriptive, but "." and ".." are not better in this regard, too. I don't know any software using "..." files, so I'd say go for it, it's the best suggestion so far, IMHO. -- lg, Chris