Does S3QL really need 1 file handle per cache entry? The reason I ask is: I would like to have a cache that matched the full file system size (ie a complete local copy); if I could do this then I could use rsync to compare files and update only the new & changed files without any unnecessary network I/O. It would also allow for the possibility of offline use.
My thinking is that one could use an LRU cache for file handles (another settings) then reopen files as and when necessary. I guess that this leads to the secondary question(s) is(are): have I misinterpreted the was S3QL works, and is there a better way to do minimal I/O sync, and to support an offline mode? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "s3ql" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
