On 23 Nov 2010, at 14:15, Andrew Deason <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 11:23:03 +0000 > Simon Wilkinson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We need a better solution to cache eviction. The problem is that, >> until very recently, we didn't have the means for one process to >> successfully flush files written by a different process. > > I'm not following you; why can the cache truncate daemon not be > triggered and waited for, like in normal cache shortage conditions? Because it doesn't do stores. More importantly, because it can't do stores, as it doesn't have access to the credentials that the file was written with. This is the key issue that I was alluding to earlier. The work that Marc has done means that, in master, we do now have access to this information on recent Linux kernels, where we use it to handle write back. We need to look at generalising this to other operating systems, and making use of it for cache eviction. S. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
