From: Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
sfrench@samba.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
vandrove@vc.cvut.cz
Subject: Re: Networked filesystems vs backing_dev_info
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 11:22:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071027152227.GE3200@cs.cmu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1193477666.5648.61.camel@lappy>
On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 11:34:26AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I had me a little look at bdi usage in networked filesystems.
>
> NFS, CIFS, (smbfs), AFS, CODA and NCP
>
> And of those, NFS is the only one that I could find that creates
> backing_dev_info structures. The rest seems to fall back to
> default_backing_dev_info.
While a file is opened in Coda we associate the open file handle with a
local cache file. All read and write operations are redirected to this
local file and we even redirect inode->i_mapping. Actual reads and
writes are completely handled by the underlying file system. We send the
new file contents back to the servers only after all local references
have been released (last-close semantics).
As a result, there is no need for backing_dev_info structures in Coda,
if any congestion control is needed it will be handled by the underlying
file system where our locally cached copies are stored.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-27 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-27 9:34 Networked filesystems vs backing_dev_info Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-27 15:22 ` Jan Harkes [this message]
2007-10-27 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-27 21:02 ` Steve French
2007-10-27 21:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-27 21:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-10-28 7:46 ` Petr Vandrovec
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071027152227.GE3200@cs.cmu.edu \
--to=jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfrench@samba.org \
--cc=vandrove@vc.cvut.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).