Yes, PFS is a some sort of namespace within a fs. People usually have wrong assumption that it's something equivalent of something in ZFS. But PFS is less important nowadays after dillon@ made a change to installation about a year ago.
I once wrote this just as a post to this ml, though it's not really anything useful for regular users. http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/2016-June/249717.html 2017-03-26 17:23 GMT+03:00 Jasse Jansson <[email protected]>: > > > On 2017-03-26 15:59, Tomohiro Kusumi wrote: >>> >>> A PFS is more like a namespace, I got that. >> >> It's a logical separation within HAMMER's B-Tree. Things >> (inode/dirents/data/etc) that belong to PFS#1 are logically clustered >> within the tree, and the same for PFS#2,3,4,etc. The only different >> one is PFS#0 which is what you have by default after newfs_hammer. >> PFS#0 includes all the other PFSes. Having logically clustered >> sub-tree and exported to userspace via PFS symlink makes >> mirror-copy/etc easier to implement when there are certain target >> directories that you want to copy to/from. > > > Sounds like some sort of namespace to me but I get the point. > > But you seems to have great knowledge about this so feel free to write the > missing doc to enlighten the rest uf us. >
