From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/37] Permit filesystem local caching
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:44:04 -0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
Cc: Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com,
       nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov,
       linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
References: <200802201907.40406.phillips@phunq.net> <20080220160557.4715.66608.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <28196.1203605703@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <28196.1203605703@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200802211444.04986.phillips@phunq.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 634
Lines: 20

Hi David,

I am trying to spot the numbers that show the sweet spot for this 
optimization, without much success so far.

Who is supposed to win big?  Is this mainly about reducing the load on 
the server, or is the client supposed to win even with a lightly loaded 
server?

When you say Ext3 cache vs NFS cache is the first on the server and the 
second on the client?

Regards,

Daniel
--
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/