On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 16:42 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> The problem is that having the server call back a bunch of clients every
> time a file changes does not really scale too well. The current
> dnotify-like proposal therefore specifies that notification is not
> synchronous (i.e. there may be a delay of several seconds), and that the
> server may want to group several notifications into a single callback.
Yah, so what I am asking is why not use inotify for the user-side
component of this system?
Wouldn't the deferring and coalescing of events occur on the server
side? So the server-side stuff would be whatever you need--your own
code using whatever protocol you wanted--but the client-side interface
would be over inotify.
Even if not, I'd be willing to make changes to inotify to accommodate
NFS's needs.
Robert Love
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
