--- erik.trimble@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
|> So, if your apps have to be programmed to be
|> versioning/consistency/checkmarking aware in any case, how
|> would having a fancy Versioning filesystem be any better
|> than using what we do now?
|> (i.e. svn/hg/cvs/git on top of ZFS/btrfs/et al)
|> ZFS at least makes significant practical advances by rolling
|> the logical volume manager into the filesystem level, but
|> I can't see any such advantage for a Versioning FS.
Given what I've read here. Then the advantage of /a/ versioning FS, would be to
have calls that make it easy for the app to version/checkmark/rollback
individual files, and not have to worry about the details on how that is
handled. The FS can make multiple copies, or just store deltas as it sees
appropriate. The app can look for matching "revision tags" and/or auto-rollback
on corrupt files.
So the magic FS a few people want (and I wouldn't mind) can't exist. But
having an interface, AND getting apps to use it, when that is common enough
between multiple OSes/FSes...
So the problems are properly defining the interface (technical). Getting
enough support between the "major" file systems (social), dealing with slow
upgrading and backwards capability (time), and then finally getting enough apps
using the interface (technical & social).
zfs-discuss mailing list