On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:
quoted text
> On 05/08/2010 01:43 AM, Amir G. wrote:
>
> As Ted mentioned in his reply, the big concern is that you are forking ext3
> instead of adding a new feature to the end of the ext* family of file
> systems.
>

That is a valid concern, but this is where Next3 stands today.
There is no intention of replacing Ext4 with Next4  as the leading ext* f/s.
The branch from Ext3 was made at the time to speed up the development
process of the snapshot feature.

quoted text
> Since we have multiple snapshot mechanisms in place already (not just btrfs
> & lvm, but don't forget all of the builtin array snapshots), I think that we
> are not in a hurry to get this done quickly. I would strongly prefer we get
> this rebased onto the latest ext4 and resubmitted.
>

If I were you I would also prefer to get snapshots in ext4, and even
snapshots along side extent mapped files,
but unfortunately, I cannot promise to deliver either anytime soon.
I can only promise my support to anyone who wishes to participate in
the merge task.

quoted text
> As far as proof goes, I think that the unfortunate burden of proof is on
> your shoulders to prove to us that we should take and maintain those new
> features given the often conflicting priorities :-)
>

What can I say, a Windows file server can display previous file
versions without using a costly storage array.
Can a RedHat server do that? Can LVM snapshots be used to do that?
The CTERA NAS appliances do that using Next3.

Amir.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html