Instead, expect _sane_ semantics. The same way you have to do magic things
for NFS locking if you're a mail client that wants to handle atomicity, a
networked filesystem doesn't have to try to maintain exact UNIX behaviour.
A sane definition of "same file" over a network is, after all, "same
naming". What more is there?
How about "same file" is "same bag-o-bits"? Yeah, I've been working on
Unix too long. :-)
If you're thinking "same inode", then you're not thinking about a
networked filesystem. You're thinking about a distributed UNIX filesystem.
Which is a different thing.
Well, I'm no PC expert, but if my wife makes \\liberty be drive L: on Win98,
she can access the same bag-o-bits with different pathnames.
To get "same file" semantics, you acquire a lease on the file. There's no
question about that. But that is an issue that has nothing at all to do
with the _name_ of the file, whether that be a ASCII pathname or a
"filehandle". Understand that. A "lease" on a file is a real thing, and
gives you the guarantees you want - and has absolutely nothing to do with
naming.
Which is one of the nice things about file handles. Hmm. What happens
on Windows if I copy, err, drag, \\liberty\foo to L:foo? My wife has
been pretty testy lately. Maybe I better leave well enough alone.
What do you mean by lease in this context:
wasted 67% cp foo bar
cp: bar and foo are identical (not copied).
Open foo, get lease for read-but-no-writes-by-anyone, open bar, get
lease (nowait) for truncate-and-write-okay, then try the copy?
-Ric Werme
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 23 2000 - 21:00:11 EST