Nikita Danilov wrote:
> It is called "a directory". :) There is no crime in putting
>
> cc src/*.c
>
> into Makefile. I think that Hans' query-result-object denoting multiple
> objects is more like directory than single regular file.
So a file system query that results in multiple files generates a
"virtual directory"?
Timothy Miller wrote:
>
>
> Nikita Danilov wrote:
>
>> It is called "a directory". :) There is no crime in putting
>>
>> cc src/*.c
>>
>> into Makefile. I think that Hans' query-result-object denoting multiple
>> objects is more like directory than single regular file.
>
>
> So a file system query that results in multiple files generates a
> "virtual directory"?
>
>
>
Remember that this code does not exist yet.....;-)
Sounds like it might be a good way to do it though.
--
Hans
On Tuesday 04 November 2003 09:13, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Timothy Miller wrote:
> > Nikita Danilov wrote:
> >> It is called "a directory". :) There is no crime in putting
> >>
> >> cc src/*.c
> >>
> >> into Makefile. I think that Hans' query-result-object denoting multiple
> >> objects is more like directory than single regular file.
> >
> > So a file system query that results in multiple files generates a
> > "virtual directory"?
>
> Remember that this code does not exist yet.....;-)
>
> Sounds like it might be a good way to do it though.
Yes and this also solves the "refine feedback" problem: Just return
sth. useful in the stat->nlink for that directory
or even create a new stat-like syscall.
Now the issuer can decide on ANY level, whether to refine the search or
accept the result to present it in a listing.
A proper replacement for nlink is looong overdue.
But even with the crappy one, we have now, it can be decided since a
list of 65K is too much for a proper selection and cannot be handled by
a user. Somebody even said that every search pattern revealing more
than 50 records is not refined enough.
PS: Hans, we just saved you the funding on this topic.
Regards
Ingo Oeser
Ingo Oeser wrote:
>On Tuesday 04 November 2003 09:13, Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>
>>Timothy Miller wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Nikita Danilov wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>It is called "a directory". :) There is no crime in putting
>>>>
>>>>cc src/*.c
>>>>
>>>>into Makefile. I think that Hans' query-result-object denoting multiple
>>>>objects is more like directory than single regular file.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>So a file system query that results in multiple files generates a
>>>"virtual directory"?
>>>
>>>
>>Remember that this code does not exist yet.....;-)
>>
>>Sounds like it might be a good way to do it though.
>>
>>
>
>Yes and this also solves the "refine feedback" problem: Just return
>sth. useful in the stat->nlink for that directory
>or even create a new stat-like syscall.
>
>
I don't understand what you are saying about nlink. Can you say more?
>Now the issuer can decide on ANY level, whether to refine the search or
>accept the result to present it in a listing.
>
>A proper replacement for nlink is looong overdue.
>
>But even with the crappy one, we have now, it can be decided since a
>list of 65K is too much for a proper selection and cannot be handled by
>a user. Somebody even said that every search pattern revealing more
>than 50 records is not refined enough.
>
>
If the user is looking for only one record....
>PS: Hans, we just saved you the funding on this topic.
>
>Regards
>
>Ingo Oeser
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Hans