Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 00:09:28 +0000 From: David Rhodus <sdrhodus@gmail.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, scottl@freebsd.org, phk@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> Subject: Re: Google SoC idea Message-ID: <fe77c96b05060917096eed6fce@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <42A718EF.30803@samsco.org> References: <42A475AB.6020808@fer.hr> <20050607194005.GG837@darkness.comp.waw.pl> <20050607201642.GA58346@walton.maths.tcd.ie> <42A6091C.40409@samsco.org> <42A6C311.5090400@fer.hr> <42A6FF04.706@samsco.org> <42A71464.8070705@fer.hr> <42A718EF.30803@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/8/05, Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> wrote:
> Ivan Voras wrote:
> > Scott Long wrote:
> >
> >> Again, I'm not exactly sure how a generic mechanism can handle the
> >> distinction of data vs. metadata vs. journal data. Also, what you
> >
> >
> > I don't care about the distinction at this level - all data is treated
> > equal.
> >
>=20
> But for journalling to work, you must care about the distinction.
No, one does not have to concern oneself if the data block they are
currently processing is data or metadata. That issue is completely
dependent on the type of journaling implementation one is trying to
achieve.
--=20
-David
Steven David Rhodus
<drhodus@machdep.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fe77c96b05060917096eed6fce>