On 21 Dec 2002, Brian Pane wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-12-21 at 07:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I'm really sorry, but I am sick of hearing this isn't a solution for apps > > in general. This is now the fourth time that I have asked for a clear > > description of _why_. I helped to design and write buckets and > > bucket_brigades. I understand them incredibly well. You seem to be > > unable or unwilling to give a clear description of the problem you are > > having. All you are doing is hand-waving saying that this might be a > > problem for some apps. Give a clear description please. > > Sorry, but that's just bogus. I've described repeatedly, and in > detail, the reasons why we can't make bucket allocation dependent > on pools. You keep posting objections along the lines of "but we > can just move a brigade into a pool of appropriate scope," when > you know that's not a solution. No, that is a solution, in fact, it was part of the original design. What you've done is said "The brigade may not live long enough", but you haven't explained how that is the case. You also haven't explained why moving the buckets to another brigade won't work. Which I have a very hard time believing, because that is how Apache works today. You also haven't answered the problem that even _WITH_ this change, you still need to move the buckets to a new brigade. At the end of the day, this change doesn't get you anything, because you _still_ have to do the brigade migration that you say you can't do. Ryan
