From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:24:30 +0200 From: Sape Mullender To: 9fans@9fans.net CC: 9fans@9fans.net In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [9fans] =?utf-8?b?z4Bw?= Topicbox-Message-UUID: 656c75ca-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Are we talking about πP or 9P? ΠP doesn't have Twalk. It has open, which combines clone, walk, and open from 9P. Before you start jumping up and down and telling me that you can't open without revieing the qids from the walk (to check them for mount points), let me tell you that we are also tackling mount tables. Mount tables will no longer match qids but longest prefix path names. We know the semantics are different. But you have to look hard to find realistic situations where the difference matters. I intend to write a πP design document that explains the whole concept in excruciating detail. There's a lot more to it than just changing walk and open. Sape > From: lucho@ionkov.net > To: 9fans@9fans.net > Reply-To: 9fans@9fans.net > Date: Thu Oct 14 23:13:59 CES 2010 > Subject: Re: [9fans] πp > > It can't be dealt with the current protocol. It doesn't guarantee that > Topen will be executed once Twalk is done. So can get Rerrors even if > Twalk succeeds. > > 2010/10/13 Venkatesh Srinivas : > >> 2) you can't pipeline requests if the result of one request depends on the > >> result of a previous. for instance: walk to file, open it, read it, close > >> it. > >> if the first operation fails, then subsequent operations will be invalid. > > > > Given careful allocation of FIDs by a client, that can be dealt with - > > operations on an invalid FID just get RErrors. > > > > -- vs > >