Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 07:20:30PM +1100, Darren Reed wrote: > >> Frank Hofmann wrote: >> >>> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/rename.html >>> >>> ERRORS >>> The rename() function shall fail if: >>> [ ... ] >>> [EXDEV] >>> [CX] The links named by new and old are on different file systems >>> and the >>> implementation does not support links between file systems. >>> >>> Hence, it's implementation-dependent, as per IEEE1003.1. >>> >> This implies that we'd also have to look at allowing >> link(2) to also function between filesystems where >> rename(2) was going to work without doing a copy, >> correct? Which I suppose makes sense. >> > > If so then a cross-dataset rename(2) won't necessarily work. > > link(2) preserves inode numbers. mv(1) does not [when crossing > devices]. A cross-dataset rename(2) may not be able to preserve inode > numbers either (e.g., if the one at the source is already in use on the > target).
Unless POSIX or similar says the preservation of inode numbers is required, I can't see why that is important. Darren _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
