| |||||||||||||
That's the setup I have - and HATE itThat's the setup I have - and HATE itPosted Jan 9, 2009 18:43 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: That's the setup I have - and HATE it by roblucid Parent article: Btrfs aims for the mainline
Permitting layers, I could imagine some specialised "meta" filesystem being feasible, that would give you a name space, that lets you tag directories and files with storage characteristics using more traditional type file systems as backing stores for bulk data storage. I believe you're describing object storage. The lower of those layers is the object layer. But it differs from a traditional filesystem in that the only names the objects (files) have are made up by the system (essentially, inode numbers). In most of the work on object storage, that layer actually lives in a hardware unit separate from the one with the POSIX filesystem image, but it could be in the kernel between the filesystem drivers and the block device drivers as well (if it hasn't been done already). But we do need to ask whether there is a need to have more than one future filesystem type with this kind of storage function before we put a lot of effort into making a reusable layer.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||