Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:20:17 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: michaelh@cet.co.jp Cc: terry@lambert.org, eric@ms.uky.edu, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vclean (was The VIVA file system) Message-ID: <199608270220.TAA23773@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960827092559.16443D-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from "Michael Hancock" at Aug 27, 96 09:41:37 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The address space compression is interesting for vnode-based buffering; > > FreeBSD currently uses this method, but... well, I've railed often > > enough against vclean that I think everyone knows how I feel. > > Some subsystems now depend on the ability to disassociate buffers from > vnodes. For example, kill the session leader and the session terminal is > revoked from all children and the deadfs is associated with the vnode. > The only call that doesn't return an error is close() and the children > eventually exit. > > I think what needs to be looked at is having more synchronized buffer > cache/vnode recycling policies. Inode data, disklabel data, and any other FS object which is not file contents is not cached under the current policy. Further, dissociating buffers from vnodes does not require that they be returned to a global pool for clean-behind. I think the non-opacity of vnodes is a mistake. 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?199608270220.TAA23773>