(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
If you'd looked further then you might have noticed that the server looks up first by name and then does a strtol or something and checks for the volume by number. Jan On August 2, 2014 1:32:54 PM EDT, u-codalist-z149_at_aetey.se wrote: >On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 12:16:50AM +0200, u-codalist-z149_at_aetey.se >wrote: >> > > - volume names to be treated as comments, meant for humans only, >> > > dropping the corresponding indirection layer and the related >code >> > >> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 01:54:06PM -0400, Jan Harkes wrote: >> > The corresponding indirection layer is only used for humans. >Internally >> > Coda clients and servers use the volume id, the only places the >name is >> > used is for cfs makemount and when volume ids are mapped back to >names >> > when we display updates in f.i. codacon or cfs listvol. >> >> Oh, thanks! A confusion of mine has been cured. >> I believed mountpoints contained volume names. > >I rechecked. >With all due respect now I no longer can agree with your statement >above. > >Looking at vproc_pioctl.cc: > > ... > /* A mount-link is virtually identical to a symlink. > * In fact Coda stores mount-links as symlinks on the > * server. The only visible differences are that the > * mount-link has a Unix modemask of 0644, while a > * symlink has 0777. A mountpoint's contents always > * start with '#', '@' (or '%'?) > ... > * Regular mount-links start with a '#', optionally >==============> * followed by a volume name (current path is >used in > * case the volume name is not specified), optionally > ... > * Internally, Venus creates mount-links starting with > * '@', followed by a Fid (volume.vnode.unique), > * optionally followed by '@' and a realm/domain name. > * These are used for conflicts and during repair to > * mount a specific object in the fake repair volume. > * > * -JH > ... > >So your statement reflects the latter kind of mountpoints but not >the regular ones. > >I also clearly see the code in venusvol.cc which at least while >crossing >realm boundaries actually does lookup volume names. This means they >do have semantics for the clients, not only for humans. >This is what I want to change. > >I see this dialogue as a very clear illustration of how easy it is >to be confused about the semantics of the different numerous kinds >of data being passed around in Coda. Let us make this amount smaller. > >Best regards, >RuneReceived on 2014-08-02 13:39:32