From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] network storage quips From: Brantley Coile Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:36:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-tboxpeqweajbwhkxmrovjhyqvq" Topicbox-Message-UUID: a0c13f6c-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-tboxpeqweajbwhkxmrovjhyqvq Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit we've heard these objections for a couple of years, but have yet to see real problems. in most cases people accept a local swap disk, which fixes the whole problem and still avoid captured data on the server. you can even have two swap disks mirrored. --upas-tboxpeqweajbwhkxmrovjhyqvq Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by coraid.com; Thu Oct 27 18:30:19 EDT 2005 Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 571AA63CB3 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:29:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 7945D63B9A for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:29:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (psuvax1 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 10158-01-31 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:29:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lavoro.terzarima.net (spc1-york1-5-0-cust142.seac.broadband.ntl.com [80.0.45.142]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 6D123637FA for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:29:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: Charles Forsyth Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 23:29:27 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cse.psu.edu Subject: [9fans] network storage quips X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: 9fans-bounces+brantley=coraid.com@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-bounces+brantley=coraid.com@cse.psu.edu today i noticed in a recent ;login: a conference summary of the 2005 Kernel Developers Summit, which observed that the convergence of networking and storage subsystems ``can cause problems when memory gets tight; the block layer needs to write out pages to free memory, but a network-based storage layer must allocate memory to accomplish those writes. There are things that can be done to address this problem, but Linus Torvalds also wants to push back on the manufacturers of these systems. Rather than go through all this trouble to make network-based storage work, wouldn't it be better to just install a local disk?'' --upas-tboxpeqweajbwhkxmrovjhyqvq--