Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 7 May 1999 18:18:25 -0500 (EST)
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@rush.net>
To:        Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: memory-based VFS
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.990507181246.7628b-100000@cygnus.rush.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9905071547530.93800-100000@janus.syracuse.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 7 May 1999, Brian Feldman wrote:

> On Fri, 7 May 1999, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 7 May 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, May 7, 1999, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:
> > > > The v9fs memory-based VFS, written by Aaron Marks, is available at
> > > > http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rminnich/
> > > 
> > >    Doesn't this do the same thing as MFS?
> > 
> > Yes, but without the mount_mfs process kludge it seems to allow for
> > single copy, rather than double copy and extra context switches, it 
> > uses kvm instead of a user process for backing store.
> 
> So what would be wrong with using a swap-backed vn(4) and newfs/tunefs/
> mounting it?

It's a kludge, a MUCH improved kludge, but yet a kludge.

You can't for instance... resize the filesystem, it will do FFS-y
type things where there is no need to do them, even in async mode.

Limits on inodes, limits on block sizes... it could all be changed
dynamically with a "real" mfs.

-Alfred 



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.990507181246.7628b-100000>