From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Dec 22 20:44:50 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA23420 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:44:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA23415 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:44:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA10868; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:44:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 20:44:42 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199812230444.UAA10868@apollo.backplane.com> To: David Greenman Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vfs_bio / struct buf Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG : The optimization is primarily for short writes (like 1 byte or a few bytes) :so couldn't really be replaced by something that has 512 byte granularity :without losing some performance. Granted, applications that show this behavior :are probably broken, but that's another issue. : :-DG : :David Greenman :Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project Ah. Hmmm. I see the problem... the buf's need some sort of native block size and NFS doesn't really have a native block size. -Matt Matthew Dillon Engineering, HiWay Technologies, Inc. & BEST Internet Communications & God knows what else. (Please include original email in any response) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message