From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:17:12 -0400 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <9235d3fce85ed5cfde0d027fc453f734@coraid.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] A little more ado about async Tclunk Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7253ab96-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Fri Oct 29 13:15:45 EDT 2010, forsyth@terzarima.net wrote: > > Let's try to define 'decent' for this thread -- a decent fileserver is one > > on which close()s do not have any client-visible or semantic effect other > > than to invalidate the Fid that was passed to them. Lets see how many file > > servers we can think of that are 'decent': fossil, kfs, ken, memfs, ... > > unfortunately, fossil and kfs both can have important visible state changes on a clunk, > so that lets them out. i think we're reducing this down to "it's easy to cache the hell out of immutable files". - erik