Re: ShadowFS (status)

[Niels Möller]

Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> 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...

/Niels