Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:52:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:52:33 -0500 Received: from mons.uio.no ([129.240.130.14]:32757 "EHLO mons.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:52:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15510.28326.558485.955067@charged.uio.no> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 23:48:06 +0100 To: Pavel Machek Cc: Alexander Viro , Alan Cox , Simon Richter , Jonathan Barker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: VFS mediator? In-Reply-To: <20020318223827.GD1740@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> X-Mailer: VM 6.92 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no From: Trond Myklebust Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>>> " " == Pavel Machek writes: > Okay, take userland nfs-server. (This thread was about userland > filesystems). Yech... Nobody should be seriously considering using unfsd: it does not even manage to follow the NFS protocol. That inability was one of the many reasons why Olaf Kirch abandoned further develpement of unfsd and started work on knfsd. > Then, make memory full of dirty pages. Imagine that nfs-server > is swapped-out by some bad luck. What you have is extremely > nasty deadlock, AFAICS. [To free memory you have to write out > dirty data, but you can't do that because you don't have enough > memory for nfs-server]. So that is another argument for using knfsd rather than unfsd. I will agree with you that NFS is not perfect, but please judge it on its actual merits and not on some trumped up charge... Cheers, Trond - 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/