> I loath the idea of pushing state into 9P, but I wonder if a combination 
> of client side cfs with a kqueue-like 'file is modified' server event 
> might not solve most of the problem.  Layered into aan perhaps?

Not sure if I missunderstand you but I am _not_ suggesting pushing any
state into p9.

My thoughts where modifying cfs heuristics to reduce the probability of
waiting for a coherence check (which could be quite a few RTTs).

In the limit I also suggested providing a synthetic file which contains
dirstat(1) info on modified files as they change - which I think is what
you mean by a "kqueue-like 'file is modified' server".

The problem with implementing this as a server program on the fileserver machine
is that _all_ fossil/kfs/kenfs file accesses would have to pass through this 
server
to be sure that a when a file is changed by somone else you are informed.
As fossil (what I use)  already knows this info I thougt it would be as well 
for it 
to provide this file itself.

hope this clarifies.

-Steve

Reply via email to