On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 15:48 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > Also, glib has wrappers for making mmaping available to programs, to
> > > improve seldom-accessed sparse databases efficient, do you want to
> > > prohibit that too?
> > 
> > No, mmap() is clearly a tool for a different kind of problem. If you’re
> > accessing an mmap()ed file, you need to be sure it’s local anyway, I
> > think? GMappedFile doesn’t have async versions of its methods,
> > presumably for this reason.
> 
> mmap() works pretty Ok these days over NFS. Concurrent access
> doesn't. But as long as you just want to access something, it's
> fine...
> 
> That said it's probably not a good idea to use mmap() for stuff below
> $HOME...

OK, that’s good to know. In any case, GMappedFile doesn’t have async
methods, so it’s a moot point.

> > As above, how about making that line the distinction between calling
> > functions from gstdio.h and using GIO? In the former case, you know
> > you’re operating on local files. In the latter, you could be operating
> > on files from the moon.
> 
> I'd always leave some freedom for the developers. It is certainly good
> to document things and push people into the right directions, but I
> think there are many cases where the developer should have every right
> to prefer sync access for valid reasons, even from the main loop...

I understand where you’re coming from; we should not be irritating
experienced developers. I completely agree.

What do you think of the proposal to use sync gstdio.h for
small/local/pseudo-file-system I/O and async GIO for all other I/O?

It might turn out that runtime checks are just not feasible, but in that
case I think we still need some way of solving the original problem:
that people are using sync calls and blocking up the main loop.

Philip

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Reply via email to