From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Oct 3 23:38:22 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA01241 for fs-outgoing; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 23:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usr08.primenet.com (tlambert@usr08.primenet.com [206.165.6.208]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01236 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 23:38:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA08655; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 23:37:53 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199710040637.XAA08655@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Known problems with async ufs? To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 06:37:53 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, ccsanady@bob.scl.ameslab.gov, brandon@roguetrader.com, wilko@yedi.iaf.nl, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Michael Hancock" at Oct 3, 97 01:28:27 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Reads advance the file pointer, unless they are mread. Same for write vs. > > mwrite. [ ... ] > It's probably more important in the context of NFS servers where > things are stateless. A read here is packaged with file > positioning so repeated receives of the same request doesn't hurt > anything. amread takes a file offset; it's there (in other OS's) to support kernel preeemptive threading. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.