| |||||||||||||
Unioning file systems: Architecture, features, and design choicesUnioning file systems: Architecture, features, and design choicesPosted Jan 15, 2013 15:03 UTC (Tue) by hummassa (subscriber, #307)In reply to: Unioning file systems: Architecture, features, and design choices by hummassa Parent article: Unioning file systems: Architecture, features, and design choices
> It does break the (reasonable) assumption that after a successful rm(1) of a file that file will be gone (in the sense of »open("/c/x", O_RDONLY) fails«), rather than replaced by the next one over.
Why would this assumption be reasonable? It's not a single-process, single-user system. Once you remove a file, other processes are totally permitted to re-create it immediately.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||