From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Update on Fossil+Venti Stuff In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 21 Mar 2007 16:17:12 EDT." <9ab217670703211317o1958d9b3u647f6ac4fac758cd@mail.gmail.com> From: Bakul Shah Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:24:30 -0700 Message-Id: <20070321212430.9477B5B09@mail.bitblocks.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 2b67845e-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Sounds to me like you want fossil to be a true cache -- lazily writing to venti as more space is needed (or at regular intervals) and reading back from venti if something is needed and not in cache. I wonder if doing so would simplify fossil.... its size would become a function of peformance (to control data spill/fill rates). And one would have to always use fossil+venti and never just fossil. Not to mention venti then becomes the true file server and one can imagine building other front end cache filesystems. > This would be fine with me, however, it seems that, by doing > this, there's no way to get all of my mp3s listed in a single > directory -- they would be archived by snapshot date / number, and I'd > have to search through all of those to get a full list of music. You can always bind(1) all the snapshots under your music directory!