Differences between revisions 15 and 39 (spanning 24 versions)
Revision 15 as of 2006-04-15 19:35:03
Size: 1270
Comment:
Revision 39 as of 2008-01-18 12:56:19
Size: 1414
Editor: localhost
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
= Foreword = = unionfs-fuse =
Line 3: Line 3:
This is my effort to create a unionfs filesystem implementation which is probably slower but way more flexible than the current in-kernel unionfs solution. Currently it's almost fully usable, the only problem is new file/directory creation which I will fix soon... This is my effort to create a unionfs filesystem implementation which is probably slower but way more flexible than the current in-kernel unionfs solution.
Line 7: Line 7:
[[GoogleAd()]] If you've sent me something and think it takes me too long to answer, go check UndeliverableMail page. I might have problems sending mail to you...

<<GoogleAd>>
Line 17: Line 19:
 * Compared to kernel-space solution we need lots of useless context switches which makes kernel-only solution clear speed-winner

== A
vailable parameters ==

 * {{{--roots=/root1
,/root2}}}
 * {{{--stats}}}
 * Compared to kernel-space solution we need lots of useless context switches which makes kernel-only solution clear speed-winner (well, actually I've made some tests and the hard-drives seem to be the bottleneck so the speed is fine, too)
Line 26: Line 23:
 * Add support for creating directories
 * Add support for choice which roots are read-only and which are not
 * Add cache controls
Line 31: Line 25:
[[GoogleAd()]] <<GoogleAd>>

== Donation ==

If you use the software and like it, please consider a donation (provided by Pay''''''Pal)...

<<PayPalDonation>>
Line 35: Line 35:
 * Latest version: 0.10 (released 2006-02-01)  * Latest version: 0.18 (released 2007-08-09)
Line 37: Line 37:
 * Repository location: http://hg.podgorny.cz/unionfs-fuse (Mecrurial)

unionfs-fuse

This is my effort to create a unionfs filesystem implementation which is probably slower but way more flexible than the current in-kernel unionfs solution.

I'm open to patches, suggestions, whatever (at radek@podgorny.cz)...

If you've sent me something and think it takes me too long to answer, go check UndeliverableMail page. I might have problems sending mail to you...

Why choose this stuff

  • The filesystem has to be mounted after the roots are mounted when using the standard module. With unionfs-fuse, you can mount the roots later and their contents will appear seamlesly
  • You get caching which speeds things up a lot for free
  • You get nice stats (optional)

Why NOT choose it

  • Compared to kernel-space solution we need lots of useless context switches which makes kernel-only solution clear speed-winner (well, actually I've made some tests and the hard-drives seem to be the bottleneck so the speed is fine, too)

TODO

  • Handle writing to /stats intelligently

Donation

If you use the software and like it, please consider a donation (provided by PayPal)...

Download