Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:39:50 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, David Xu <bsddiy@21cn.com> Subject: Re: vm balance Message-ID: <18021.987493190@critter> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Apr 2001 23:02:19 PDT." <200104170602.XAA55944@beastie.mckusick.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200104170602.XAA55944@beastie.mckusick.com>, Kirk McKusick writes: >I am still of the opinion that merging VM objects and vnodes would >be a good idea. Although it would touch a huge number of lines of >code, when the dust settled, it would simplify some nasty bits of >the system. When I first heard you say this I thought you were off your rockers, but gradually I have come to think that you may be right. I think the task will be easier if we get the vnode/buf relationship untangled a bit first. I may also pay off to take vnodes out of diskoperations entirely before we try the merge. >Under the old name cache implementation, decreasing >the number of vnodes was slow and hard. With the current name cache >implementation, decreasing the number of vnodes would be easy. Actually the main problem is that NFS relies on vnodes never being freed to hold "soft references" using "struct vnode * + v_id). -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18021.987493190>