[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ShadowFS (status)

From: Niels Möller
Subject: Re: ShadowFS (status)
Date: 03 Aug 2001 15:27:33 +0200

Marcus Brinkmann <> writes:

> Also an interesting case: One underlying fs provides a file x, and one a
> directory x.  What do you do?

read/write requests go to the file, dir-lookups to the directory? At
least that's a reasonable way to define the "union" of the nodes. I'm
not sure that it is a reasonable for users, though...

If you think this way, you never get a "collision" between nodes until
more than one node supports read/write. One could pervert it even more
if one node is a read-only file and the other a write-only file...


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]