On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 08:20:30 PST erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net> wrote: > > All this reflections arise from the search for an orthodox way to change > > the tree structure of a synthetic filesystem. > > Moving large real files is not my actual issue here. I'm wondering for a > > synthetic filesystem in which, when you move a folder in a special > > directory, something magic happens. > > As far as I can see, it is not possible with a 9p2000 fileservice, is it? > > i don't see why you can't make a magic directory that works that way.
i agree with you that the magic is upto the fileserver to provide but more generally, i think it would be an interesting experiment for Giacomo Tesio to try to extend 9p. attempting to extend something is a great way to learn. Tmove of files on the same real FS can save a lot of unnecessary traffic. Tmove of dirs can save some traffic too. of course either type of move must be allowed to fail and must fail without any damage if an atomic move is not possible. i think unix and plan9 design reflects choices available in 70s & 80s and it certainly makes sense for someone not burdened with that history to reexamine the design choices. machines are much faster now so micro efficiency is less critical but latency is more so. and storage capacities have grown much faster than network bandwidth so opportunities for flinging less data about should be looked at. the unification of synthetic and real filesystems seems rather constraining now. storage is used much more creatively now and may be distributed. can there a generalized protocol for distributed storage? lots of ideas to play with!
