From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Apr 17 13: 3:13 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 614E437B42C for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 13:03:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3HK2hU27003; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:02:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Matt Dillon , Kirk McKusick , Julian Elischer , Rik van Riel , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, David Xu Subject: Re: vm balance In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 Apr 2001 12:58:38 PDT." <20010417125838.J976@fw.wintelcom.net> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:02:43 +0200 Message-ID: <27001.987537763@critter> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20010417125838.J976@fw.wintelcom.net>, Alfred Perlstein writes: >I thought vnodes were in stable storage? They are, that's the point Matt is not seeing yet. >Note that I really don't care for using stable storeage as a hack >to deal with this sort of thing. Well, I have to admit that it is a pretty smart way of dealing with it for remote operations, but the trouble is that it prevents us from ever lowering their number again. If Matt can device a smart way to loose the soft reference in nfs, vnodes can be a truly dynamic thing. -- 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