From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp Subject: Re: New filesystem for Linux kernel Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:09:29 +0900 Message-ID: <7306.1235621369@jrobl> References: <7558.1235374266@jrobl> <7769.1235374482@jrobl> <49A268A7.1010708@slax.org> <49A26ACC.90804@slax.org> <49A3AC14.2050107@slax.org> <11287.1235481490@jrobl> <15922.1235492819@jrobl> Cc: tomas@slax.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Received: from vsmtp03.dti.ne.jp ([202.216.231.138]:63660 "EHLO vsmtp03.dti.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751453AbZBZEJx (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 23:09:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Miklos Szeredi: > I'd personally be more motivated to review <2000 line chunks (where > each step adds new functionality and makes sense in itself), than a > 20000 line filesystem all in one. That is reasonable. :-) > Perhaps it's easier, but copy-up is a very inefficient operation, both > in disk space and in time. My personal opinion is that a "delta" I have to agree again. > But that's just a thought, I haven't gone too deeply into this. > > > If you say "just a part of write" goes to a new fs, then I don't think > > we can support several essential features, for instance mmap. > > It should be possible to support mmap. In a easy way? I know you already wrote it is just a thought, but if you have an idea to support mmapping a file which is distributed multiple filesystems, please let me know. J. R. Okajima