Re: I oppose Chris and Jeff's patch to add an unnecessary additional namespace to ReiserFS

Christoph Hellwig
2004-04-27T18:06:39Z

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 10:58:26AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Ask the users whether their laptops, etc., seem to go a lot faster with
> V4. They seem to be pretty happy with it.
>
> V4 fixed all of V3's serious performance flaws, and totally obsoletes
> it. I am very happy with it.

Hans, that's not what we're discussing in this thread. I don't give a shit
whether filesystem A is fater than filesystem B on task C. Really, how
fast a fs is an implementation details.

I also still think someone who does most work in the last years on a fs
(Chris on reiserfs v3) should be considered maintainer, but that's just my
2cents and I'd rather leave that to you guys.

The important part is xattr/acl/namespace semantics. In Linux those
semantics are at the _VFS_ level, not at the individual filesystem,
in fact if a fs can mess with namespace semantics I'd almost considere
that a bug.

So if you want different xattr/acl semantics after you ignored all the
discussion has been going on the last years start *now* to discuss you
proposal on -fsdevel, and acl-devel, explaining why your semantics are
better and hash out the implementation details to support both
transparently.

Funneling in new semantics through a low level driver is pretty much
always wrong.