From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4b124b3339c2c26f28c75ffc17bd70cb@proxima.alt.za> To: 9fans@9fans.net Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 10:59:20 +0200 From: lucio@proxima.alt.za In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] wstat and atomic directory change Topicbox-Message-UUID: 40f14e98-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > I'm not an advocate of Tmove in any way, but I can't really grasp the cons. > I'm sure that its omission was an explicit design choise, but where I > can read about the arguments that lead to such decision? It's a long time ago, but I seem to recall that the clinching argument hinged around mounted directories. Without making an a priori decision about each one, an atomic move is not viable. Remember that to the OS the difference between a local and a remote object is intentionally invisible. And then you need to add per-user and per-process namespaces... Lucio.