On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 07:29:44PM +0400, Ilia Zykov wrote: > > First, one of the goals here is to have one table for all vnodes. > > Allow me to disagree, what is advantage has only one table? > I see only disadvantage.
The reason (the only reason, really) is to bound the total size of the vnode cache across all fses and keep all the vnodes on a single least-recently-used chain. That way if I do something that grinds in /tmp for a while it will cycle in vnodes from the root fs and cycle out the ones from /home, and if I go back to ~ it will cycle in the ones from /home in favor of the ones from /tmp. Otherwise it would be much simpler (and probably more scalable) to have one cache per fs. -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org