From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <70d2a5064da065159537d6cef43c19db@quanstro.net> To: 9fans@9fans.net From: erik quanstrom Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:43:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1233614010.4412.412.camel@goose.sun.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] Sources Gone? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 92ca643e-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > I don't think it does. At least not in a way that is obvious to me. > The one and only fundamental limitation of the current interface > offered by venti is that I can give it a score to something that > doesn't belong to me and it gives me the information back. It is > the limitation of the API, not the way data is managed. IOW, if > a block that I genuinely own happens to also be referenced from > a hierarchy that I do NOT have access to -- its ok. ownership doesn't mean anything at the venti level. it really is just a virtual disk drive with lba80 content addressing. one doesn't "own" blocks on a regular disk drive, either. suspending the preceeding logic for a bit, supposing that you did "track ownership", then each block could have any number of owners. this would mean that you couldn't store n copies of a block for the cost of one block's storage. you would need to allocate some storage for each time the block is stored to track ownership. - erik