From owner-freebsd-current Wed Nov 13 05:15:23 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA15589 for current-outgoing; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 05:15:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from friley216.res.iastate.edu (friley216.res.iastate.edu [129.186.78.216]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA15582; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 05:15:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from friley216.res.iastate.edu (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by friley216.res.iastate.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA03860; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 07:15:19 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199611131315.HAA03860@friley216.res.iastate.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96 To: dyson@FreeBSD.org cc: gibbs@freefall.freebsd.org (Justin T. Gibbs), roberto@keltia.freenix.fr, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: pbufs (was: Re: ufs is too slow?) In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 11 Nov 1996 23:22:28 -0500. <199611120422.XAA03836@dyson.iquest.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 07:15:18 -0600 From: Chris Csanady Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> >> Yes, please get rid of the locked buffer stuff. That code is EVIL. >> >> BTW,do you have any plans for removing the 64k I/O limitation? It sorta >> sucks when you want to write a 1meg segment to have to cut it up into such >> small pieces. >> >You have always hated that!!! I plan to do something to create alternate >mappings: segments. Segments will probably use a yet to be enhanced >VM/Buffer cache pbuf mechanism (not to be confused with VJ's networking VJ's pbufs? ive not heard of these before, what are they? i remember hearing something about him rewriting the tcp/ip stack to work well on gigabit networks... this wouldnt have anything to do with it, would it? probably not i suppose, but if anyone could point me to papers on anything related, id apreciate it. :) Chris Csanady >pbufs.) There will be no 64K limitation as such. I am still listening >to "bright ideas" though :-). > >John >