From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262386AbTJ3L7U (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:59:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262395AbTJ3L7U (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:59:20 -0500 Received: from thebsh.namesys.com ([212.16.7.65]:39590 "HELO thebsh.namesys.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262386AbTJ3L7S (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:59:18 -0500 Message-ID: <3FA0FD15.40207@namesys.com> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:59:17 +0300 From: Hans Reiser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wichert Akkerman CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Things that Longhorn seems to be doing right References: <3F9F7F66.9060008@namesys.com> <20031029224230.GA32463@codepoet.org> <20031030015212.GD8689@thunk.org> <3FA0C631.6030905@namesys.com> <20031030081739.GB1399@wiggy.net> In-Reply-To: <20031030081739.GB1399@wiggy.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.76.7.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org You don't need extended attributes, you just needs files and directories.... www.namesys.com/v4.html says more. Hans Wichert Akkerman wrote: >Previously Hans Reiser wrote: > > >>It is true that there are many features, such as an automatic text >>indexer, that belong in user space, but the basic indexes (aka >>directories) and index traversal code belong in the kernel. >> >> > >Sure, but if you have a kernel which supports arbitraty extended >attributes for files you don't need much more kernel support. You >can implement things like metadata for files and query languages on >top of that in userspace. If you modify applications to (also) put some >metadata (meta tags from html pages, document properties from office >documents, etc.) in those extended attributes you might already be where >microsoft is going. > >You only would need some kernel interaction if you want to keep an >updated index of file contents (dnotify for a while filesystem and >reindexing whole files instead of blocks doesn't sound very attractive). > >Wichert. > > > -- Hans