* Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020223 16:41] wrote:
> :
> :* Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020223 14:43] wrote:
> :>     This is approximately what I am thinking.  Note that this gives us the
> :>     flexibility to create a larger infrastructure around the bucket cache,
> :>     such as implement per-cpu caches and so on and so forth.  What I have
> :>     here is the minimal implementation.
> :
> :I strongly object to this implementation right now, please do not
> :commit it.  I already explained to you how to make the problem
> :go away but instead you insist on some complex api that pins
> :memory down like the damn zone allocator.  It's not needed, so
> :please don't do it.
> :
> :-Alfred
>     Woa!  Timeout!  I'm not planning on comitting any sort of malloc thingy.
>     That was a 10 second thought experiment.

Usually when I see diff(1) output from you I usually expect a commit
within the next half hour or so, I just wanted to make myself clear
on the issue.  No worries. :)

Yes, and hopefully JeffR's allocator will fix our problems, that
is if it ever makes it out of p4. :)

-Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
 start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'
Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to