Re: viewprinting: what format should views be stored in?

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

George Beshers wrote:

>
>
> Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>> George Beshers wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Still, a "batch mode" for production servers is a concept that 
>>> should not be
>>> discarded too quickly as static masks would certainly support a more
>>> efficient implementation
>>
>>
>>
>> I dispute this point. What do you think would be more efficient than 
>> reiser4 directories? Or are you referring to compiled regular 
>> expressions?
>>
> Only as a secondary issue. I was thinking about the possibility of a 
> linked-list of static masks.
> In that case it would make sense to form a single "composed" mask 
> which allows access to
> just the objects that all the masks allow---basically a set intersection.
>
> Further, an interesting algorithm would be to do the intersection 
> lazily, i.e., so that the composed
> mask actually is created only for those objects (or perhaps just 
> directories) actually in a path.
> Obviously the case where this wins is when there are a lot of open 
> calls to some directory.
>
> BTW: we might call a view (as in the database sense) the "mask + name 
> mangling + ..." as Lamont's
> comment rings true.

Let's get the 80% done, and leave the 20% refinements which are as much 
code as the 80% for later.;-)

>
> Also, I downloaded a paper on evaluating RE which I can send along if 
> you and Nate are interested.

Send it when we get to evaluating REs, and I will be interested then.

>
>
>>> --- that the savings would be significant is still
>>> very much an open question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>