Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 23:08:55 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: ccsanady@bob.scl.ameslab.gov (Chris Csanady) Cc: brandon@roguetrader.com, wilko@yedi.iaf.nl, tlambert@primenet.com, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Known problems with async ufs? Message-ID: <199709242308.QAA23263@usr03.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199709242024.PAA06819@bob.scl.ameslab.gov> from "Chris Csanady" at Sep 24, 97 03:24:19 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Hopefully, this will not be an issue for long considering Kirk's soft > updates work. Hopefully it will be a general soloution, and not a specific soloution like the SVR4 UFS soloution in Appendix A of the Ganger/Patt paper. If it's not a general soloution, then you will need to maintain one set of ufs code for ffs to use, and another for lfs and the others that currently rely on the ufs code as well. It will also mean that there are no hooks to guarantee transactions are idempotent (multiple atomic transactions considered as an all-or-nothing unit) for something like a user accessible transaction tracking system. Finally, it will mean that the problem was not solved as a list of order-dependency vectors, and it will just as much of a problem to add support to other FS's as it was to add to ffs. 8-(. Better to not rush him and to let him get it right... Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709242308.QAA23263>