On 07/09/2010 10:15 PM, Gilliam, PaulX J wrote: > > The 'flaw' David mentioned will not effect my use because it is related to the way hard disks work and I am using SSD's for backing store. > > If anyone comes up with a fix or workaround to make cacheFS work better with hard disks for backing store, I would diffidently be interested, just to make sure it will continue to work fine with SSD's, if for no other reason. > > Plus, in the sprit of open source software development, I would hope that we can work together and make cacheFD work for everyone. There are many elements to this design that make it superior to the alternative (cachefiles). yes, I should admit that I was impressed when reading about CacheFS and its design. However, I'm not sure whether I understand the design flaw that is being discussed (I'll have to dig up the mailing lists, I think). > Suresh, I hope you will join the fun. > I would need to understand it better before I comment, but why not if I could do something... Thanks, > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linux-cachefs-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cachefs- >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Howells >> Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 6:00 AM >> To: Linux filesystem caching discussion list >> Subject: Re: CacheFS status >> >> Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> I find multiple references about the CacheFs filesystem (caching >>> backend) in Documentation/Caching of kernel source. However, I could not >>> locate the code inside the kernel tree. >>> >>> What is the status of CacheFS? Has it not been accepeted? Why? >>> Where can I find the sources? >> >> Development on it is stalled because I hit a flaw in my design. I can send >> you the code if you want. >> >> David >> >> -- >> Linux-cachefs mailing list >> Linux-cachefs@xxxxxxxxxx >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs -- Suresh Jayaraman -- Linux-cachefs mailing list Linux-cachefs@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs
