very simple datastore reimplementation
jg at laptop.org
Thu May 8 14:34:31 EDT 2008
On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 20:22 +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Jim Gettys <jg at laptop.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 16:06 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > > On 5/8/08, Jim Gettys <jg at laptop.org> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 13:09 +0000, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm having trouble understanding what you are requesting and what
> > > > > could be done about that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you please enumerate the requirements that affect the internal
> > > > > file layout and any other view that we may be able to provide?
> > > >
> > > > That there is *some* hope of finding a file by a human in a raw file
> > > > system, that can be done with software already present on the system....
> > >
> > > With the proposed metadata text file, there's already that hope. You
> > > think it's not enough and you may very well be right. What I'm asking
> > > is: how big an effort are we willing to devote to this and until which
> > > point we want to compromise on robustness and simplicity?
> > Until we know what the tradeoffs really are, we need to explore in this
> > direction. Names only as hashes has proved to be a major headache in
> > practice in the field.
> That's true. But I also think the FUSE layer will make a big
> difference in this regard, at the point that it *might* be enough.
This doesn't begin to deal with a USB stick taken to a Windows box...
No FUSE on such systems.
Having to have two different naming systems (one local, one removable
device) seems like duplication that should be avoided (if possible).
> I agree anyway that more transparency at the raw file system level
> would be desiderable and that we should figure out what are exactly
> the tradeoffs there.
Jim Gettys <jg at laptop.org>
One Laptop Per Child
More information about the Devel