Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:33:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:33:15 -0500 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:61261 "EHLO frodo.biederman.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:32:56 -0500 To: Hans Reiser Cc: Rik van Riel , Shawn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh MacDonald Subject: Re: Possible Idea with filesystem buffering. In-Reply-To: <3C4B3703.6080101@namesys.com> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: 21 Jan 2002 08:29:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: <3C4B3703.6080101@namesys.com> Message-ID: Lines: 23 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hans Reiser writes: > > > >That is exactly what the VM does. > > > So basically you continue to believe that one cache manager shall rule them all, > > and in the darkness as to their needs, bind them. Hans any other case generally sucks, and at best works well until the VM changes and then breaks. The worst VM's I have seen are the home spun cache management routines for compressing filesystems. So trying for a generic solution is very good. I suspect it easier to work out the semantics needed for reiserfs and xfs to do delayed writes in the page cache than to work out the semantics needed for having to competing VM's... Eric - 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/