From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <f25d96cdd28b3c19735f0bc2242e3e28@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] killing processes
From: Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 17:07:42 +0200
In-Reply-To: <6cf9c9fd3d137685c7460de39f207d00@huygens.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8c13be14-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Yes, you can tell cfs to clear the cache on startup, but then you lose a lot
> of speed during the early phases of running.

Out of ignorance, perhaps, I'd expect to be able to distinguish at
startup between the target roots and make a decision accordingly.
Would the namespace not be able to offer alternative caches in such a
situation?  That would be just about ideal, wouldn't it?

++L