On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Hans Reiser wrote: > Ragnar Kj�rstad wrote: > > >>If you choose to use Samba, you will want to make sure that the sendfile > >>stuff is implemented. Unfortunately, the directory indexing in Reiser does > >>not help that much a lot of the time because Samba is forced to do > >>directory scans because it has to implement case-independent > >>lookups/searches. > >> > >> > > > >Isn't that an configuration-option? > > > >As a sidenote, I think it wouldn't be too hard to make reiserfs > >optionally case-insensitive, but still able to use indexes. Perhaps it > >would even be possible to have two virtual directories pr traditional > >directory? one that has a regular index and one that has a > >case-insensitive index. Of course this is not relevant for the > >right-here right-now choice of fileservers, but.... > > > > > > > > > There is quite a lot that could be done to optimize for Samba, but > nobody is sponsoring it unfortunately. Seems like some money could be > made by a clever appliance vendor....
The issues are complex. Samba still needs some work to make it perfect for appliance vendors, for example, although Andrew is talking about an NTFS layer which will make things better. Those same appliance vendors will need/want file system changes, esp if they are trying to support NFS and CIFS off of the same box, and they tend to want to push many of the clever bits into the file system and keep them propietary :-) This is certainly true of the three vendors that I have any experience with. However, I expect some patches for XFS will become available in the not too distant future. Regards ----- Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]ns.aus.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org, sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com
