On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:00, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 02:01:09PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Making the server stateless is wrong
Because it leads to all the problems we have seen! Why not have the client
have an open file handle (the way Samba works and the way the Unix file
system API works)? Then when the server goes down the client sends a request
to open the file again...
> making the readdir a multioperation act is wrong
> why? i have 3M directories... ar you saying clients should read the
> whole things at once?
No. findfirst()/findnext() is the correct way of doing this. Forcing the
client to read through 3M directory entries to see if "foo.*" matches
anything is just wrong. The client should be able to ask for a list of file
names matching certain criteria (time stamp, name, ownership, etc). The
findfirst() and findnext() APIs on DOS, OS/2, and Windows do this quite well.
If you have 3M directory entries then SMB should kick butt over NFS.
Also while we're at it, one of the worst things about NFS is the issue of
delete. Because it's stateless NFS servers implement unlink as "mv" and
things get nasty from there...
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page