From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:20:49 -0800 From: Roman Shaposhnik In-reply-to: <13426df10811112058q5f54d697x80152b170524a296@mail.gmail.com> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-id: <886E16CF-8F8F-455E-A556-7770EADC77CB@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; delsp=yes; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <1226365206.17713.390.camel@goose.sun.com> <29302f743a99f05c1d9ac196b0245f81@9netics.com> <5d375e920811110830k1c91a401y5e6f39f1737d4240@mail.gmail.com> <140e7ec30811110954u44f8f9aeg788dc34b7d35ac69@mail.gmail.com> <140e7ec30811111811i15f2e2bp3761d477e6c90aed@mail.gmail.com> <13426df10811112058q5f54d697x80152b170524a296@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] Do we have a catalog of 9P servers? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3e71794a-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Nov 11, 2008, at 8:58 PM, ron minnich wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:11 PM, sqweek wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen > > wrote: >>> I have two measurements of success: >>> a) what keeps me working on Plan 9 related technologies in a paid >>> position >>> b) what switches people from using NFS, GPFS, or other horribly >>> complicated solutions to something closer to Plan 9 >> >> Fair enough. Does .L still qualify as "closer to Plan 9", or is it >> NFS by any other name? > > well it's pretty different from NFS. >> Please excuse the inflammatory phrasing - that's an honest question. >> I'm very ignorant about NFS and its differences from 9p, other than >> the number of message types. > > > They're utterly different, at every level. Yes, they give you a > similar service, but ... Whoa! That's a pretty strong claim. Care to substantiate? The way I see it: if you look past stalessness (taken care of in WebNFS and NFS4) eagerness to do proper caching and on-the-wire messages there are, actually, quite a few similarities between the two: FH is a moral equivalent of a Qid ACCESS is a moral equivalent of open SETATTR/GETATTR is like stat/wstat LOOKUP is like walk (especially so in WebNFS) READ/WRITE/CREATE/REMOVE is there in both That leaves READLINK, MKDIR, SYMLINK, MKNOD, RMDIR, RENAME, READDIR[PLUS] and some FSINFO* stuff. Now, you can't do POSIX without SYMLINK, READLINK, MKNOD and RENAME so I expect to see them in .L That leaves MKDIR/RMDIR and READDIR[PLUS] which doesn't strike me as that huge of a diff. Am I missing the point you're trying to make? Thanks, Roman.