Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> >>>>> " " == Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The current code does rely on hidden knowledge of the filesytem
> > on the server, and refuses to operate with any FS that does not
> > describe a position in a directory as an offset or hash that
> > fits into 32 or 64 bits.
>
> I'm not saying that ReiserFS is wrong to question the correctness of
> this. I'm just saying that NFSv2 and v3 are fixed protocols, and that
> it's too late to do anything about them. I read Chris mail as a
> suggestion of creating yet another NQNFS, and this would IMHO be a
> mistake. Better to concentrate on NFSv4 which is meant to be
> extendible.
>
> > But be calm, I am not planning on fixing this myself anytime in
> > the next year, we have an ugly and hideous hack deployed in
> > ReiserFS that works, for now I am just saying the folks who
> > designed NFS did a bad job and resolutely continue doing a bad
> > job, and if someone wanted to fix it, they could fix cookies to
> > use filenames instead of byte offsets for those filesytems able
> > to better use filenames than byte offsets to describe a
> > position within a directory, and for those clients and servers
> > who are both smart enough to understand filenames instead of
> > cookies (able to understand the cookie monster protocol).
>
> This is something which I believe you raised in the NFSv4 group, and
> which could indeed be a candidate for an NFSv4 extension. After all,
> this is in essence a recognition of the method most NFS clients
> implement for recovering from an EBADCOOKIE error. Why was the idea
> dropped?
Lack of desire to do anything, near as I could tell.
>
> (Note: As I said, under Linux we're currently hampered when
> considering the above alternatives by the fact that glibc requires the
> ability to lseek() on directories. This is a bug that they could
> easily fix, and it affects not only your suggestion, but also all the
> other suggestions in which one implements non-permanent cookies)
I would be quite happy if you (or anyone) could fix it, sometime in the next 3 years.
>
> Cheers,
> Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
