Current-Users archive

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

Re: NiLFS changes and usage inquiry


Jut my two cents. I think you should go with nilfs3 proposal as at the end it has it’s benefits. One still could keep current implementation for just reading if necessary.

Regards Adam. 

Adam Hamsik
00421 904 937 495
On 9 Mar 2020, 09:52 +0100, Reinoud Zandijk <>, wrote:
Dear folks,

i'm currently looking at getting NiLFS writing support. Since the linux
adoptation of NiLFS seems to be waning I'm contemplating an incompatible
change to make it more efficient and less errorprone wuthout losing its
continous snapshot feature which is imho one of the major advantages of NiLFS.
One could call it NiLFS3 though this is just a worktitle. Compatibility with
NiLFS2 could be kept but at a conplexity cost that might not be justifyable.

My question is now, would you support such a move or would you rather keep it
compatible with the NiLFS2 implementation in Linux. I don't know how many of
you use this read compatibility right now or would like to keep it. Since disc
or device exchange is getting more rare these days due to fast interconnection
it mught be less relevant to keep the compatibility since linux also shares
FAT, NTFS, NFS and ext2(3?4?) file systems. That said, i'm trying to get one
if the origional developers of NiLFS2 on Linux to contemplate to port the
changes into the linux version too but i haven't had a reply yet.

Please do share your views with me and i'd really like feature requests too!

With regards,
Reinoud Zandijk

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index