![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > You're well wide of the mark here, in that you're relying on the assumption > that caching is important to the application he has in mind. The raw transfer > bandwidth may well be sufficient, especially if it is unimpeded by being > funneled through a bottleneck like our vfs cache. > the fact that he is saying that this needs to run normal filesystems tells us that. if you need a filesystem to max out transfer rate and don't want to have it cache things that is a VERY specialized thing and not something that will match what NTFS/XFS/JFS/ReiserFS/ext2 etc are going to be used for. either he has a very specialized need (in which case a specialized filesystem is probably the best bet anyway) or he is trying to support normal uses (in which case caching is important) however the point is that the read-modify-write cycle is a form of cache, it is only safe if you aquire a lock at the beginning of it and release it at the end. A standard filesystem won't do this, this is what makes a DFS. David Lang - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:28 [W:0.097 / U:0.540 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||