On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 08:20:30 PST erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net> wrote:
> > All this reflections arise from the search for an orthodox way to change
> > the tree structure of a synthetic filesystem.
> > Moving large real files is not my actual issue here. I'm wondering for a
> > synthetic filesystem in which, when you move a folder in a special
> > directory, something magic happens.
> > As far as I can see, it is not possible with a 9p2000 fileservice, is it?
> i don't see why you can't make a magic directory that works that way.

i agree with you that the magic is upto the fileserver to
provide but more generally, i think it would be an interesting
experiment for Giacomo Tesio to try to extend 9p. attempting
to extend something is a great way to learn. Tmove of files on
the same real FS can save a lot of unnecessary traffic. Tmove
of dirs can save some traffic too.  of course either type of
move must be allowed to fail and must fail without any damage
if an atomic move is not possible. i think unix and plan9
design reflects choices available in 70s & 80s and it
certainly makes sense for someone not burdened with that
history to reexamine the design choices. machines are much
faster now so micro efficiency is less critical but latency is
more so. and storage capacities have grown much faster than
network bandwidth so opportunities for flinging less data
about should be looked at. the unification of synthetic and
real filesystems seems rather constraining now. storage is
used much more creatively now and may be distributed. can
there a generalized protocol for distributed storage? lots of
ideas to play with!

Reply via email to