On 21.05.2011 10:33, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:01:22 +0200
> Tomasz Chmielewski<mangoo at wpkg.org> wrote:
>
>> On 20.05.2011 15:51, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
>>
>>> most of them are just an outcome of not being able to find a working i.e. best
>>> solution for a problem. cache-timeout? thread-count? quick-read?
>>> stat-prefetch? Gimme a break. Being a fs I'd even say all the cache-size paras
>>> are bogus. When did you last tune the ext4 cache size or timeout? Don't come
>>> up with ext4 being kernel vs. userspace fs. It was their decision to make it
>>> userspace, so don't blame me. As a fs with networking it has to take the
>>> comparison with nfs - as most interested users come from nfs.
>>
>> Ever heard of fsc (FS-Cache),
>
> To my knowledge there is no persistent (disk-based) caching in glusterfs at
> all ...
Correct, but just a while ago you questioned the idea of caching in the
filesystems ("When did you last tune the ext4 cache size or timeout").
It's amazing that you changed your mind so fast.
[cutting your ignorance about iSCSI and pretending you know it well]
I don't think there can be any constructive discussion with you, sorry.
If you found a bug, and even more, it's repeatable for you, please file
a bug report and describe the way to reproduce it.
Since the problems happen so often for you, I'm sure it shouldn't be so
hard to produce a good test case.
Initiating flame discussions is not really a good development model.
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
