Subject: Re: FFS journal
To: Pavel Cahyna <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
Date: 07/03/2006 11:49:59
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 08:40:09PM +0200, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 11:35:58AM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > To be honest, I think what's needed will be a mostly-physical journal.=
> > It's a physical journal, but you have the ability to flag certain inode=
> > as being unlinked, so that fsck knows to get rid of them. Also, it's go=
> This won't work if there are more orphaned files than could fit in the
It's not for orphaned files (ones that have been unlinked yet still are=20
active). It's for ones that are in the process of being worked on.
Thus the list should stay small.
You could use it for orphaned files, but you would want to limit the=20
number and have a way to indicate "more than I can say." But that's true=20
of any journal system. It should also be rare.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----