From: Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>
To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC] FUSE: mnotify (was: [RFC] VFS: mnotify)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 06:32:20 +0300
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200708120632.20777.a1426z@gawab.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1124
Lines: 30

Al Boldi wrote:
> Jakob Oestergaard wrote:
> > Why on earth would you cripple the kernel defaults for ext3 (which is a
> > fine FS for boot/root filesystems), when the *fundamental* problem you
> > really want to solve lie much deeper in the implementation of the
> > filesystem?  Noatime doesn't solve the problem, it just makes it "less
> > horrible".
>
> inotify could easily solve the atime problem, but it's got the drawback of
> forcing the user to register each and every file/dir of interest, which
> isn't really reasonable on TB-filesystems.
>
> It could be feasible to introduce mnotify, which would notify the user of
> meta changes, like atime, across the filesystem.  Something like mnotify
> could also be helpful in CoW situations, provided it supported an in-sync
> interface.

Here is an idea:  Could FUSE be used to produce mnotify behaviour?


Thanks!

--
Al

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/