> > Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > What I think this means for us is that (barring further > > discoveries) > > we > > can't completely know which volumes form a set without parsing the > > whole filesystem to look for references to othjer sessions, and > > even > > that fails in the event that all the files in the volume are > > updated. > > That might be right, yes. Anyway, how does one differentiate between > a > session of a multi-session volume, and a single session=3F AFAIK, the > single session uses session dependent block addressing, not global > one > like the multi-sessions. > So we at least need a reliable way to differentiate between both. If I interpret the standard correctly -- and in practice the implementation haven't agreed on violating it -- it is easily possible to decide, which volumes belong to a volume set. Moreover, I believe, all volumes belong to a volume set -- individual volumes, that appear not to, simply live in a one element volume set then. CU, Ingo