Re: FUSE merging?

[Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de>]

Hi, Andrew Morton wrote:

> Sorry, but I'm not buying it.  I still don't see a solid reason why all
> this could not be done with nfs/v9fs, some kernel tweaks and the rest in
> userspace.

Let's forget about NFS here. It's stateless. You don't want a wholly
stateless layer between two stateful instances; the fact that it works for
a disk-based NFS server isn't proof that it'd work for gmailfs or sshfs.

There are a lot of FUSE server implementations out there already.
You want all of them to rewrite their code for v9fs?

I admit that I don't know zilch about how difficult it is to write a v9fs
server (is there sane sample code / a support library?) or how much
overhead such a server would incur or how safe it'd be to run a
user-controlled server on the same machine as the mountpoint.
The point is that the FUSE people already cover all these points,
thus: unless there's a major technical problem with it that v9fs solves
better, I'd advocate to include it.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  smurf@smurf.noris.de
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
 - -
Magpie, n.:
	A bird whose thievish disposition suggested to someone that it
	might be taught to talk.
		-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"