On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, chas williams wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,Derek Atkins writes: > >Oh, he merged in that crap? Damn. It's a read-only, > >no-authentication, no-vlserver-lookup AFS client. What's > >the point? > > dont worry. they are going to write that part. and it will > be bug free and prefect. it does seem like a waste to rewrite > something that already works and just needs a little more work > to be really first class.
I said I was done, but I lied. I suck. IMO we need: -vcache/inode separation, with inodes containing vcache hints that must be verified on binding. the current situation where we have effectively our own inode pool needs to die -SMP-fast instead of mere SMP-safe We *may* need: -rx performance enhancements. nobody has yet quantified that it's really rx and not a client or server issue, but i suspect what Hartmut has pointed at indicates a direction: SMP linux kernel on UP machine performs better. We should also have: -stop using pioctl for things which should be a sysctl -other than "group encoding" for PAGs, but I think Linux Security Module has to survive for this to happen, and last week that wasn't clear. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
