Subject: Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: 07/09/2003 15:21:43
>>>> A new _flat_ namespace for each resource.
>>>> A new flat namespace _with human-meaningless names_ for each resource.
>>> Have you never heard of inode numbers? :-)
>> Certainly. How many APIs use them?
> Unix filesystems use inodes. :)
In the API?? The only placees I know of they appear in the API are
st_ino and d_ino (or whatever they call them these days).
> but my point was that a namespace consisting of integers isn't such a
> horrible idea
Maybe, maybe not, but your example is irrelevant - inumbers are _not_
the API-visible namespace for filesystems!
> ftok() _should_ always create a unique key to match any unique file
> and 'id' parameter (and of course _should_ always return the same key
> for the same file & 'id').
Which implies that no conformant OS on a machine with 32-bit ints can
ever support as many as 2^24 files simultaneously accessible.
Nice idea. It won't fly in practice.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML email@example.com
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B