From 2babf75c1ec3606b2f89e03656ce2d5dc5395b94 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: guilhem Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 01:05:42 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- .../comment_3_72d222020af4a9c6c753eb1ee7e1f1cf._comment | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/tips/beware_of_SSD_wear_when_doing_fsck_on_large_special_remotes/comment_3_72d222020af4a9c6c753eb1ee7e1f1cf._comment diff --git a/doc/tips/beware_of_SSD_wear_when_doing_fsck_on_large_special_remotes/comment_3_72d222020af4a9c6c753eb1ee7e1f1cf._comment b/doc/tips/beware_of_SSD_wear_when_doing_fsck_on_large_special_remotes/comment_3_72d222020af4a9c6c753eb1ee7e1f1cf._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..2624a4fd34 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/tips/beware_of_SSD_wear_when_doing_fsck_on_large_special_remotes/comment_3_72d222020af4a9c6c753eb1ee7e1f1cf._comment @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="guilhem" + ip="46.239.117.180" + subject="comment 3" + date="2013-08-19T01:05:40Z" + content=""" +A nice feature would be to perform the `fsck` on the (encrypted) remote itself, as it would avoid to clutter either the network or the tmpdir. However, that requires some changes in git-annex's backend. Indeed it would no longer be enough to store a single digest per (plain) file: a new digest needs to be stored for each encrypted copy. It is not necessarily a big deal, but the backend would need to be reorganized carefully. +"""]]