Hi Mike:
> I appreciate that this work is being done with an eye toward
> containerd "community" and standardization
> it appears that this format of OCI image storage/use is only
> used by Alibaba?
> But you'd do well to explain why the userspace solution isn't
> acceptable.
Yes overlaybd ha
> Block drivers has nothing to do on filesystem page cache stuffs, also
> currently your approach has nothing to do with pmem stuffs (If you must
> mention "DAX" to proposal your "page cache sharing", please _here_
> write down your detailed design first and explain how it could work to
> ours if y
Hi Alexander,
> all the lvm volume changes and mounts during runtime caused
> weird behaviour (especially at scale) that was painful to manage (just
> search the docker issue tracker for devmapper backend). In the end
> everyone moved to a filesystem based implementation (overlayfs based).
Yes, w
Hi Giuseppe,
> The current OCI format, with some tweaks like (e)stargz or zstd:chunked,
> already make its content addressable and a client can retrieve only the
> subset of the files that are needed. At the same time we maintain the
> simplicity of a tarball and it won't break existing clients.
On 2023/5/26 03:26, Du Rui wrote:
Hi Alexander,
all the lvm volume changes and mounts during runtime caused
weird behaviour (especially at scale) that was painful to manage (just
search the docker issue tracker for devmapper backend). In the end
everyone moved to a filesystem based implement
On 2023/5/27 11:13, Du Rui wrote:
Block drivers has nothing to do on filesystem page cache stuffs, also
currently your approach has nothing to do with pmem stuffs (If you must
mention "DAX" to proposal your "page cache sharing", please _here_
write down your detailed design first and explain h
