On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 11:22:23AM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote: > Ummmm. > > Remind me why we should support "undo" (or, more aptly named, "safe > delete") in ZFS? > > Isn't this an application feature, not a filesystem feature? I would > expect something like this behavior when using Nautilus, but certainly > not when using "rm".
This is exactly why it should be supported. It is application-independent. If you count the number of Solaris users who type 'rm' versus the number that click-and-drag files to the trash bin, I'd wager that you'd find many, many, orders of magnitude more folks who don't _want_ to rely on application features. The recycle bin is also per-user, not per-filesystem. The location of the copy is dependent on who did the original deletion, and may not be accessible (i.e. over NFS) in the same way as the original filesystem. > That is, maybe there should be a library which has a "safe delete" > system call for use by applications, and has code specific to the > various filesystems to implement the feature, but I can't really see the > point in implementing "safe delete" at the filesystem level. It screws > with too many long-standing assumptions. You don't have to have use it, it would be a property like anything else in ZFS, and one which would default to 'off'. It obviously cannot be on by default because it would violate too many POSIX rules. - Eric -- Eric Schrock, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/eschrock _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
