| To: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [reiserfs-list] Re: benchmarks |
| From: | Hans Reiser <reiser@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:01:09 +0400 |
| Cc: | rsharpe@xxxxxxxxxx, Xuan Baldauf <xuan--reiserfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>, Federico Sevilla III <jijo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-list@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Organization: | Namesys |
| References: | <Pine.BSI.4.10.10107141752080.18419-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3B507259.4436853E@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20010715052116.E7056@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3B50D058.3090008@xxxxxxxxxx> <3B50CFF6.4BE90AB0@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20010715155758.G7624@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 03:04:22AM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote: > > They still have cookies, so it is still a braindead protocol. > > NFS tries to solve some hard-problems. > > IMO, requiring the server be stateless sucks, the client IMO should be > responsible for holding state and reaquiring any resources should it > need to. > > --cw Making the server stateless is wrong, making the readdir a multioperation act is wrong, but making not letting the FS use filename as a cookie and making it use 64 bit byte offsets is the most wrong thing of all. Hans |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [SLIGHTLY OT] XFS ACL support in Samba, Seth Mos |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | growfs and mount options, Adam Cioccarelli |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [reiserfs-list] Re: benchmarks, Chris Wedgwood |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [reiserfs-list] Re: benchmarks, Chris Wedgwood |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |