From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hubert Chan Subject: Re: More on Hard Links Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:27:47 -0500 Sender: news Message-ID: <87u141tuuk.fsf@uhoreg.ca> References: <87k755y8xf.fsf@uhoreg.ca> <20031209234740.27534.qmail@web25010.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com Sorry for the lateness of this reply that I had promised to do. I've been a bit busy of late. >>>>> "Narcoleptic" == Narcoleptic Electron writes: [...] Narcoleptic> If there is a way to quickly and reliably verify that two Narcoleptic> files are identical (or not), then when committing a Narcoleptic> transaction, each file in the sync list can be resolved as Narcoleptic> follows: - If a volume ID is not found, don't commit Narcoleptic> anything (as per the current proposal). - Otherwise, if a Narcoleptic> file ID for a given volume ID refers to a file not Narcoleptic> identical to the current file (or is not found), remove the Narcoleptic> file from the sync list. This seems very inefficient, and I don't think it really solves the problem. If a file is unlinked, and then an identical file is written in its place, the system will still think it's part of the same hardlink collection, even though it shouldn't be. -- Hubert Chan - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.