Re: snapshot, checkpoints

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

David Masover wrote:

>
>
> Hans Reiser wrote:
> | Pierre Etchemaite wrote:
> |
> |> Le Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:21:58 -0500, David Masover 
> <ninja@slaphack.com> a
> |> écrit :
> |>
> |>
> |>
> |>> Good, then we don't have to immediately rewrite the wheel.  But I 
> still
> |>> would rather that we do this eventually.  My concept has the changes
> |>> stored on the same partition, seems like it may be faster, and 
> opens the
> |>> door for a filesystem-based cvs.
> |>>
> |
> | This phrase made me thing you might want to be aware of
> | http://www.namesys.com/blackbox_security.html which got darpa funding
> | recently....
>
> Looks cool, I sort of understand it, but what's it got to do with what I
> said?  What "phrase"?  Filesystem-based cvs?
>
Yes, views are an important step towards "Filesystem-based cvs", see 
clearcase as an example.  Transaction infrastructure, substantially 
present in reiser4 (see our (long) main page on reiser4 design, 
somewhere near the middle I think), is also an important component.  
Currently we support atomic sets of fs operations, although this is 
immature code (meaning reiser4 works reliably but the api is still in 
progress, etc.).