[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1193499137.5648.70.camel@lappy>
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 17:32:16 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Jan Harkes <jaharkes@...cmu.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, sfrench@...ba.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, vandrove@...cvut.cz
Subject: Re: Networked filesystems vs backing_dev_info
On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 11:22 -0400, Jan Harkes wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 11:34:26AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I had me a little look at bdi usage in networked filesystems.
> >
> > NFS, CIFS, (smbfs), AFS, CODA and NCP
> >
> > And of those, NFS is the only one that I could find that creates
> > backing_dev_info structures. The rest seems to fall back to
> > default_backing_dev_info.
>
> While a file is opened in Coda we associate the open file handle with a
> local cache file. All read and write operations are redirected to this
> local file and we even redirect inode->i_mapping. Actual reads and
> writes are completely handled by the underlying file system. We send the
> new file contents back to the servers only after all local references
> have been released (last-close semantics).
>
> As a result, there is no need for backing_dev_info structures in Coda,
> if any congestion control is needed it will be handled by the underlying
> file system where our locally cached copies are stored.
Ok, that works. Thanks for this explanation!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists