On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 04:49:58PM -0700, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 03:44:33PM -0700, Konrad Schroder wrote:
> 
>  > NFS service never quite seems to make it to the top of my to do list,
>  > although I think it should at least sort-of work.  I'll try to look at it
>  > more closely after I get VOP_PUTPAGES working.
> 
> For me, NFS service for LFS is pretty important -- I can't really use
> it otherwise.
> 
> FWIW, I really honestly think we should get LFS into a state where it's
> a "sellable" feature -- i.e. a file system thst really distinguishes us
> from other systems.  Snapshot support, "instant up after crash" (e.g.
> background fsck), etc.

As I understand it, in LFS all data (metadata + user data) are journalised.
This is one thing that make it different from other journalised FS.
This can be very usefull for mail spool for example: you may to want
a half-written mail queue entry.

> 
> BTW, it'd be nice if the cleaner were a kthread :-)

I'm not sure. With the userland cleaner you can do a lot of things.
One idea that came around was "on the fly" incremental backup, where
a segment would be pushed to tape before being marked as empty
(again I can see an immediate use of this for a mail spool :)
Much easier to do with a userland cleaner.

I'm sure we can find other examples :)

--
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
--