Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:38:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:38:17 -0400 Received: from weta.f00f.org ([203.167.249.89]:37762 "HELO weta.f00f.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:38:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 01:38:05 +1200 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Craig Soules , jrs@world.std.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: NFS Client patch Message-ID: <20010711013805.C31799@weta.f00f.org> In-Reply-To: <15178.3722.86802.671534@charged.uio.no> <15178.47928.328862.678031@charged.uio.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15178.47928.328862.678031@charged.uio.no> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i X-No-Archive: Yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 10:22:16AM +0200, Trond Myklebust wrote: Imagine if somebody gives you a 1Gb directory. Would it or would it not piss you off if your file pointer got reset to 0 every time somebody created a file? The current semantics are scalable. Anything which resets the file pointer upon change of a file/directory/whatever isn't... Anyone using a 1GB directory deserves for it not to scale. I think this is a very poor example. No that I disagree with you, the largest directories I have on my system here are 2.6MB (freedb, lots of hashed flat-files in one directory), here I do agree that you should not have to reset the counter everytime. --cw - 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/