Nikita Danilov writes:
[...]
>
> >
> > Yes. :-) It is radical, and the idea is taken from databases. I
> > thought that seemed to be the direction Reiser filesystems were moving.
> > In this scheme a name is just another bit of metadata and not
> > first-class important information. The name-query directories would be
> > there for traditional filesystem users and Unix compatibility. They
> > would probably be virtual and dynamic, only being created when needed
> > and only being persistent if assigned meta-data (extra names (links),
> > non-default permission bits, etc) or for performance reasons (faster to
> > load from cache than searching every file).
>
> That latter bit, about making them persistent, is where the tr
>
[Hmm... grue ate my message.]
That latter bit, about making them persistent, is where the trouble
begins: once queries acquire identity and a place in the file system
name-space, they logically become part of that very name-space they are
querying! This leads to various complication, and you are trying to work
around them by claiming that queries are not _always_ part of name-space
("file1 [only] **appears** to be a child..."). This non-uniform behavior
is a big disadvantage.
Nikita.
