From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <f9613b4c86f05742f8ae0b967071ec6d@quanstro.net>
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:09:08 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
In-Reply-To: <df49a7370904210703s3dc0c790xfeac3e3c0d3d75c1@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 - the next 20 years
Topicbox-Message-UUID: ed0e0e6e-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Tue Apr 21 10:05:43 EDT 2009, rogpeppe@gmail.com wrote:
> 2009/4/21 erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>:
> > what is the important use case of flush and why is this
> > so important that it drives the design?
>
[...]
> "The 9P protocol must run above a reliable transport protocol with
> delimited messages. [...]
> UDP [RFC768] does not provide reliable in-order delivery."
> (is this the canonical reference for this requirement? the man page
> doesn't seem to say it)

great post, but i still don't understand why the
protocol is designed around flush semantics.

all your examples have to do with the interaction
between flush and something else.  why is flush
so important?  what if we just ignored the response
we don't want instead?

- erik