9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@swtch.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9P2000 and p9p
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 23:10:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070411031014.25A7D1E8C1C@holo.morphisms.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <461C45A4.3060909@tecmav.com>

> There is no correlation between read and write ops executed on different 
> machines to the same file server, wherever it is running on. 

This is not true.

Suppose two programs running on two different machines
are communicating directly but also using a shared file server.

Then program A could write something to a file, tell program B
there was new data in the file, and program B could read it.
Repeat.  You get the same write, read, write, read sequence
I gave before, but without any central kernel that knows enough
to second-guess the EOD tag on the first read response -- the
reads happen using one machine, the writes using another.

You are proposing a clumsy fix to a problem that you haven't
actually demonstrated to exist.  The extra read is just not 
costly enough in practice to justify the extra complexity.

You are already doing Twalk Topen Tread Tclunk.  A second 
Tread won't hurt very much.  If you really care about minimizing
the number of requests, you'd do better to have a single "events"
file that got opened once and then polled (with blocking reads)
to get information out of the device.

Russ



  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-04-11  3:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-10 17:12 Adriano Verardo
2007-04-10 17:39 ` Charles Forsyth
2007-04-10 18:14   ` Adriano Verardo
2007-04-10 19:33     ` C H Forsyth
2007-04-10 21:28       ` Adriano Verardo
2007-04-10 18:29 ` Russ Cox
2007-04-10 22:14   ` Adriano Verardo
2007-04-10 22:38     ` Charles Forsyth
2007-04-10 22:50     ` Russ Cox
2007-04-11  2:19       ` Adriano Verardo
2007-04-11  2:55         ` erik quanstrom
2007-04-11  3:10         ` Russ Cox [this message]
2007-04-11  6:58           ` Bruce Ellis
2007-04-11  8:20             ` Charles Forsyth
2007-04-11 15:38               ` ron minnich
2007-04-11  2:50 ` Kris Maglione

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070411031014.25A7D1E8C1C@holo.morphisms.net \
    --to=rsc@swtch.com \
    --cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).