Differences between revisions 8 and 35 (spanning 27 versions)
Revision 8 as of 2006-01-27 19:00:46
Size: 1111
Comment:
Revision 35 as of 2007-08-09 12:06:45
Size: 1320
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 3: Line 3:
This is my effort to create a unionfs 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.

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

[[GoogleAd()]]
Line 13: Line 17:
 * 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 22: Line 21:
 * Add support for creating directories
 * Add support for choice which roots are read-only and which are not
 * Add cache controls
 * Handle writing to /stats intelligently
Line 26: Line 23:
== Releases == [[GoogleAd()]]
Line 28: Line 25:
 * Latest version: 0.9 (released 2006-01-27) == Donation ==

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

[[PayPalDonation()]]

== Download ==

 * Latest version: 0.18 (released 2007-08-09)
Line 30: Line 35:

If you want to follow the development closely, see my mercurial repository at:

 * http://hg.podgorny.cz/unionfs-fuse

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)...

GoogleAd()

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

GoogleAd()

Donation

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

PayPalDonation()

Download

If you want to follow the development closely, see my mercurial repository at: