Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] vfs: Add vfs_copy_file_range() support for pagecache copies
From: Andy Lutomirski <hidden>
Date: 2015-10-14 18:38:13
Also in:
linux-btrfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-nfs
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:08:40AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:quoted
quoted
So what I'm hearing is that I should drop the reflink and dedup flags and change this system call only perform a full copy (with preserving of sparseness), correct? I can make those changes, but only if everybody is in agreement that it's the best way forward.I personally rather like the reflink option. That thing is quite useful.reflink is very useful, probably more useful than the copy actually. But it is different from a copy. It should be a separate interface.
One might argue that reflink is like copy + immediate dedupe. Also, I can imagine there being network protocols over which you can't really tell the difference between reflink and server-to-server copy. --Andy -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html