Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:56:13 +0200 | From | Mike Hommey <> | Subject | Re: [fuse-devel] [PATCHSET] CUSE: implement CUSE |
| |
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:30:32PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > Archie Cobbs wrote: > >> Thought about that but it's really no different from nbd or loop > >> depending on your application and block devices don't really implement > >> the file operations so it won't have too much in common with FUSE. > > > > I think BUSE would be useful. For one, it allows you to avoid problems with > > the extra caching you get with a loopback device. And NBD is too limiting > > for some applications. > > > > For my half-ignorant analysis of the caching issues, see: > > http://code.google.com/p/s3backer/wiki/PerformanceConsiderations#Caching > > > > This is also an example of an application where NBD doesn't suffice. > > > >> Also, there's the complication of going out to disk for more memory cases. > > > > Not sure what you mean exactly (my fault), but it seems BUSE would have fewer > > places for memory problems (including deadlocks) than loopback over FUSE, > > which is the only way to do this kind of stuff now. > > Yeah, compared to loopback over FUSE, anything would have less > problem. :-) I don't know much about nbd but it's pretty much solving > the same problem so I think it's logical to extend nbd including > giving it a new transport if necessary? Or is there something > fundamentally better when it's done via FUSE?
My gutt feeling is that it would have less overhead when done via FUSE than through nbd, but that could be wrong.
Mike
| |