Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966807Ab3DQUxW (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:53:22 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-f171.google.com ([209.85.217.171]:56925 "EHLO mail-lb0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966783Ab3DQUxU (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:53:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [188.6.195.195] In-Reply-To: References: <20121220122702.4101.80042.stgit@maximpc.sw.ru> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 22:53:18 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] fuse: close file synchronously From: Miklos Szeredi To: Maxim Patlasov Cc: Kirill Korotaev , Pavel Emelianov , fuse-devel , Brian Foster , Kernel Mailing List , devel@openvz.org, Anand Avati Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 756 Lines: 17 On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Let's approach it from the other direction: what if you give back the > write lease on the first flush? It will probably work fine for 99% of > cases, since no other writes are going to happen after the first > flush. For the remaining cases you'll just have to reacquire the > lease when a write happens after the flush. I guess performance-wise > that will not be an issue, but I may be wrong. What about this? Thanks, Miklos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/