Talk:Olpcfs: Difference between revisions

From OLPC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
Also consider using 9P instead of FUSE as it can give you implicit distributed file system capabilities -[[User:Ericvh|Ericvh]] 15:34, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
Also consider using 9P instead of FUSE as it can give you implicit distributed file system capabilities -[[User:Ericvh|Ericvh]] 15:34, 21 March 2008 (EDT)


In order to guard against database corruption, I suggest that any important file attributes be stored as xattrs on the file (in addition to within the index). Whether the file is a landmark version and maybe MIME type is important. Preview is not important. Tags might be important. [[User:Jpritikin|Jpritikin]] 10:12, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
In order to guard against database corruption, I suggest that any important file attributes be stored as xattrs on the file (in addition to within the index). Whether the file is a landmark version and maybe MIME type is important. Preview is not important. Tags might be important. The most trustworthy database is the kind you can 'rm -rf' and regenerate. [[User:Jpritikin|Jpritikin]] 10:12, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 14:36, 29 April 2008

If you haven't already, consider taking a look at the Linux version of Venti as well, it is available in the plan 9 from user space suite: http://swtch.com/plan9 Also consider using 9P instead of FUSE as it can give you implicit distributed file system capabilities -Ericvh 15:34, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

In order to guard against database corruption, I suggest that any important file attributes be stored as xattrs on the file (in addition to within the index). Whether the file is a landmark version and maybe MIME type is important. Preview is not important. Tags might be important. The most trustworthy database is the kind you can 'rm -rf' and regenerate. Jpritikin 10:12, 29 April 2008 (EDT)