Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider storing metadata (UNISONLOCALNAME, ar/fp files) within a replica #1036

Open
gdt opened this issue May 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
Labels
discuss way forward is unclear; needs discussion of approach to take and why effort-high issue is likely to require >20h of effort, perhaps much more enhancement issue is a request for a feature, and not a defect impact-medium medium importance

Comments

@gdt
Copy link
Collaborator

gdt commented May 7, 2024

Currently, unison stores ar/fp metadata in .unison, and gethostname/UNISONLOCALNAME is implicitly a property of the host. There are two practices for which this is problematic:

  1. mounting various external disks on /mnt, as is ancient UNIX tradition.
  2. mounting an external disk on multiple machines

For both, having the archives with the data, rather than with the machine, would simplify usage and make it more robust. In case 1, people could run unison from a remote machine to dest:/mnt and have each destination treated separately. In case 2, one could sync to foo:/mnt and later bar:/mnt, considering the disk the target of the sync and which host is currently fronting for it as unimportant.

This approach has the theoretically-pleasing advantage of keeping metadata and data bound to each other. It of course almost certainly has disadvantages.

This is complementary to but separate from #1026 which is about moving from hostname to some stored unique name/id.

@gdt gdt added enhancement issue is a request for a feature, and not a defect impact-medium medium importance effort-high issue is likely to require >20h of effort, perhaps much more discuss way forward is unclear; needs discussion of approach to take and why labels May 7, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discuss way forward is unclear; needs discussion of approach to take and why effort-high issue is likely to require >20h of effort, perhaps much more enhancement issue is a request for a feature, and not a defect impact-medium medium importance
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant