RE: 9/10 intermezzos prefer eating memory

["Peter J. Braam" <braam@clusterfs.com>]

 
Hi Andrew, 

I would just like to say that I have no difficulties with intermezzo being
rm -rf'd.  There are probably only a handful of users.   

In the past 4 years nobody has supported InterMezzo sufficiently for it to
become successful. I have been fortunate to get really good support for the
Lustre project.  So I have focussed on that.  Lustre 1.X has become really
solid.

The disconnected operation, caching and mirroring functionality of
InterMezzo will become available in Lustre as a new feature in version 2.  

So I see no point in keeping InterMezzo if it is a nuisance.  

I am also entirely happy to ask my one part time InterMezzo programmer to do
a better job of repeatedly sending pathes until they are in.

Please guide me along.  Thanks!

- Peter -


> -----Original Message-----
> From: intermezzo-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net 
> [mailto:intermezzo-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On 
> Behalf Of Arjan van de Ven
> Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 4:22 PM
> To: Anton Blanchard
> Cc: akpm@osdl.org; intermezzo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; 
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: 9/10 intermezzos prefer eating memory
> 
> On Sun, 2004-05-02 at 10:00, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Im sure the 4kB stack brigade wont be too happy about this:
> 
> I thought intermezzo would have been rm -rf'd by now...
>