Re: Elastic Quota File System (EQFS)

[Fao, Sean]

Pavel Machek wrote:

> > > What action should be taken can be specified by the user while making the
> > > files elastic. He can either opt to delete the file, compress it or move it
> > > to some place (backup) where he know he has write access. The corresponding
> > >      
> > - having files disappear at the discretion of the filesystem seems to be
> >  bad behaviour: either I need this file, then I do not want it to just
> >  disappear, or I do not need it, and then I can delete it myself.
> >    
>
>
> Actually, think .o or mozilla cache files... You don't need them, but if you have them,
> things are faster.
>  
I fail to understand the point you're trying to make.  Are you 
suggesting that a feature doesn't necessarily have to be implemented, 
just because it's there?  If so, the proposed idea on the "elastic" file 
system differs greatly.  Cached content, for instance, speeds up the 
browsing experience *without* hindering the ability of the application 
to function normally.  Caching is a true enhancement --in most 
circumstances.  I can personally see no way to implement EQFS without 
greatly exasperating end users with its shortcomings.

Sean

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