From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
To: ptb@it.uc3m.es, Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>
Cc: "Peter T. Breuer" <ptb@it.uc3m.es>,
linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mount flag "direct"
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:31:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E17mISM-0005j3-00@starship> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200209031641.g83GfnD10219@oboe.it.uc3m.es>
On Tuesday 03 September 2002 18:41, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> > Distributed filesystems have a lot of subtle pitfalls - locking, cache
>
> Yes, thanks, I know.
>
> > coherency, journal replay to name a few - which you can hardly solve at
> > the
>
> My simple suggestion is not to cache. I am of the opinion that in
> principle that solves all coherency problems, since there would be no
> stored state that needs to "cohere". The question is how to identify
> and remove the state that is currently cached.
Well, for example, you would not be able to have the same file open in two
different kernels because the inode would be cached. So you'd have to close
the root directory on one kernel before the other could access any file. Not
only would that be horribly inefficient, you would *still* need to implement
a locking protocol between the two kernels to make it work.
There's no magic way of making this easy.
--
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-03 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-03 15:01 Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-03 15:13 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-03 15:53 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-09-03 16:04 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-03 16:08 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-03 15:16 ` jbradford
2002-09-03 15:37 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-09-03 15:44 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-03 16:23 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-03 16:41 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-03 17:07 ` David Lang
2002-09-03 17:30 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-03 17:40 ` David Lang
2002-09-04 5:57 ` Helge Hafting
2002-09-04 6:21 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-04 6:49 ` Helge Hafting
2002-09-04 9:15 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-04 11:34 ` Helge Hafting
2002-09-03 17:26 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-03 18:02 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-09-03 18:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-03 17:29 ` Jan Harkes
2002-09-03 18:31 ` Daniel Phillips [this message]
2002-09-03 18:20 ` Daniel Phillips
[not found] <20020907164631.GA17696@marowsky-bree.de>
2002-09-07 19:59 ` [lmb@suse.de: Re: [RFC] mount flag "direct" (fwd)] Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-07 21:14 ` [RFC] mount flag "direct" Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-08 9:23 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-09-08 9:59 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-09-08 16:46 ` Peter T. Breuer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E17mISM-0005j3-00@starship \
--to=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lmb@suse.de \
--cc=ptb@it.uc3m.es \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®