From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <ee9e417a05090916064dad4060@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri,  9 Sep 2005 19:06:49 -0400
From: Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>
To: Francisco Ballesteros <nemo@lsub.org>,
	Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] reliability and failing over.
In-Reply-To: <600308d605090916023b856b47@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <600308d605090913554224787d@mail.gmail.com>
	<20050909210534.GI4207@server4.lensbuddy.com>
	<600308d6050909151067389b35@mail.gmail.com>
	<ee9e417a050909152442b0a400@mail.gmail.com>
	<599f06db050909155055507829@mail.gmail.com>
	<600308d605090916023b856b47@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: 
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 866beafe-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Plan B usage shows that latency is the biggest problem.
> I admit that only in unions, but if you join N different file servers
> in a directory, and then you dup the latency, it may be a problem.
> A workaround is just not to join too many servers, but it's a workaround,
> not a fix.

Of course, one could issue walks in parallel to all members
of a union and then you'd get rid of this particular problem.
And doing so would be easier in user space.

Russ