On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 08:33:53PM +, David Holland wrote:
>
> So I have no immediate comment on the patch but I'd like to understand
> better what it's doing -- the last time I crawled around in it
> (probably 7-8 years ago) it appeared to among other things have an
> incestuous relationship
m...@netbsd.org writes:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 08:05:21PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> However, I am pleased to report that the coda people have said that they
>> are working on a fuse interface, although it's expected to be slower.
>> We'll see, both if it materializes and how fast it is.
>
>
m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) writes:
> Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>> However, I am pleased to report that the coda people have said that they
>> are working on a fuse interface, although it's expected to be slower.
>
> FUSE vs kernel does not really matter when we deal with network
> filesystem
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 08:05:21PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
> However, I am pleased to report that the coda people have said that they
> are working on a fuse interface, although it's expected to be slower.
> We'll see, both if it materializes and how fast it is.
That'd be neat.
... can we get
Greg Troxel wrote:
> However, I am pleased to report that the coda people have said that they
> are working on a fuse interface, although it's expected to be slower.
FUSE vs kernel does not really matter when we deal with network
filesystem performance. The latency of requesting a network
David Holland writes:
> So I have no immediate comment on the patch but I'd like to understand
> better what it's doing -- the last time I crawled around in it
> (probably 7-8 years ago) it appeared to among other things have an
> incestuous relationship with ufs_readdir such that if you tried
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:25:38PM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
> I am guessing that not many people use coda (or they just haven't
> complained) as it seems like the coda kernel support has suffered some
> bit-rot. Trying to access a coda file system on -current results in a
> couple of KASSERTs
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 09:01:40AM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
>
> No, you can easily check for the presence of the userland binaries in ATF
> and skip the test if they are missing.
>
OK, no problems
> I can setup a server for my test environment and install the userland tools
> on the test
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 08:04:20AM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
> You need the userland installed from pkgsrc and a coda server configured
> before it will work so setting up atf is challenging.
No, you can easily check for the presence of the userland binaries in ATF
and skip the test if they are
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 2:38 PM Greg Troxel wrote:
> I volunteer to bug Satya about using FUSE instead of a homegrown
> (pre-FUSE) kernel interface.
Which Satya is this?
>
> I am unaware of anytning else that allows writes while disconnected and
> reintegrates them. I have actually done
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 08:04:20AM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 07:39:26PM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:06:37PM +0100, Hauke Fath wrote:
> > > ISTR that somebody on the CODA mailing-list suggested a re-implementation
> > > as userland
I volunteer to bug Satya about using FUSE instead of a homegrown
(pre-FUSE) kernel interface.
I am unaware of anytning else that allows writes while disconnected and
reintegrates them. I have actually done that, both on purpose and for
several days while my IPsec connection was messed up, and it
On 20.11.2018 20:06, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <20181120183715.ga11...@homeworld.netbsd.org>,
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:25:38PM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
>>>
>>> Comments? Anyone really care?
>>
>> IMO - your call (or christos's). You two have done more than enough for
>>
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 07:39:26PM +, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:06:37PM +0100, Hauke Fath wrote:
> > ISTR that somebody on the CODA mailing-list suggested a re-implementation
> > as userland file-system, but I don't think much has happened on that front.
>
> note
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:18:56AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I used to use it, and may again. So I'd like to see it stay, partly
> because I think it's good to keep NetBS relevant in the fileystem
> research world. I am expecting to see new upstream activity.
>
I guess it is obvious that I
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:06:37PM +0100, Hauke Fath wrote:
> ISTR that somebody on the CODA mailing-list suggested a re-implementation
> as userland file-system, but I don't think much has happened on that front.
note that you can cd /usr/tests/fs; atf-run as user, because
they're mostly not
At 17:52 Uhr +0100 20.11.2018, Maxime Villard wrote:
>Le 20/11/2018 Ý 16:18, Greg Troxel a ©crit :
>> I used to use it, and may again. So I'd like to see it stay, partly
>> because I think it's good to keep NetBS relevant in the fileystem
>> research world. I am expecting to see new upstream
In article <20181120183715.ga11...@homeworld.netbsd.org>,
wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:25:38PM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
>>
>> Comments? Anyone really care?
>
>IMO - your call (or christos's). You two have done more than enough for
>the rest of us that we can tolerate some work if you like
In article ,
Maxime Villard wrote:
>Le 20/11/2018 à 16:18, Greg Troxel a écrit :
>> I used to use it, and may again. So I'd like to see it stay, partly
>> because I think it's good to keep NetBS relevant in the fileystem
>> research world. I am expecting to see new upstream activity.
>
>The
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 08:25:38PM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
>
> Comments? Anyone really care?
IMO - your call (or christos's). You two have done more than enough for
the rest of us that we can tolerate some work if you like coda.
We really should have tests for it if you are interested in
Le 20/11/2018 à 16:18, Greg Troxel a écrit :
I used to use it, and may again. So I'd like to see it stay, partly
because I think it's good to keep NetBS relevant in the fileystem
research world. I am expecting to see new upstream activity.
The problem is that CODA is not relevant in this
I used to use it, and may again. So I'd like to see it stay, partly
because I think it's good to keep NetBS relevant in the fileystem
research world. I am expecting to see new upstream activity.
But, I think it makes sense to remove it from GENERIC, and perhaps have
whatever don't-autoload
Le 20/11/2018 à 10:57, Jason Thorpe a écrit :
On Nov 20, 2018, at 9:55 AM, Brett Lymn wrote:
Comments? Anyone really care?
Honestly, I think we should probably remove it.
+1
I am guessing that not many people use coda (or they just haven't
complained) as it seems like the coda kernel support has suffered some
bit-rot. Trying to access a coda file system on -current results in a
couple of KASSERTs firing - the first is easy, we need to lock the vnode
on readdir but
24 matches
Mail list logo
