From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p65B1TvV252490 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 06:01:30 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 572601E58ECE for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 04:01:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id TknFJlndPSgJk1sB for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 04:01:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:01:27 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC] remove filestreams support? Message-ID: <20110705110127.GA27102@infradead.org> References: <20110704153443.GA21501@infradead.org> <20110705015458.GZ561@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110705015458.GZ561@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 11:54:58AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > So rather than deprecating the functionality, perhaps we should look > at implementing it through a simpler, more generic, better > integrated interface? That will increase the usefulness of the > functionality for a much wider audience than it has now, and also > provide the virt/blk throttling folk with exactly the "don't cross > the streams" functionality they suggest filesystems are unable to > support easily..... That does indeed sound simpler, and also more useful. Do the users who have chimed in here (and off list) think such a scheme would be useful for them? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs