From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: smiley@zenzebra.mv.com To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> References: <8662qej52i.fsf@cmarib.ramside> <86d3km6qz0.fsf@cmarib.ramside> <20110416182213.8E1D5B849@mail.bitblocks.com> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:44:32 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20110416182213.8E1D5B849@mail.bitblocks.com> (Bakul Shah's message of "Sat, 16 Apr 2011 11:22:13 -0700") Message-ID: <864o5r623j.fsf@cmarib.ramside> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [9fans] Q: moving directories? hard links? Topicbox-Message-UUID: d1e19a3c-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Bakul Shah writes: > Ask yourself *why* do you need it. Is it just convenience > (what you are used to) or is there something you do that > absolutely requires hard links? Next compare the benefit > of hardlinks to their cost. It is worth it? I'm trying to create a data structure in the form of a directed acyclic graph (DAG). A file system would be an ideal way to represent the data, except that P9 exposes no transaction to give a node more than one name. I could store the data in a P9 file system tree and maintain a set of links in, say $home/lib/bindrc.d/myDAG. But, every time I copy/relocate/distribute the tree, I would have to include the myDAG bindings. It would be much nicer if the structure of the data embodied in the data itself. ATM, I'm thinking about creating a DAGfs backed by pq. That way, standard file utilities could still be used be used to manipulate the data. However, that solution strikes me as being suspiciously similar to creating a new disk file system. (How many do we have, already?) -- +---------------------------------------------------------------+ |E-Mail: smiley@zenzebra.mv.com PGP key ID: BC549F8B| |Fingerprint: 9329 DB4A 30F5 6EDA D2BA 3489 DAB7 555A BC54 9F8B| +---------------------------------------------------------------+