Re: FUSE merging?

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > > >  I leave the decision to you ;)  It's a separate independent patch
> > > > > >  already (fuse-nfs-export.patch).
> > > > > 
> > > > > Let's leave it out - that'll stimulate some activity in the
> > > > > userspace-nfs-server-for-FUSE area.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Speaking of which, dumb question: what does FUSE offer over simply using
> > > > > NFS protocol to talk to the userspace filesystem driver?
> > > > 
> > > > Oh lots:
> > > > 
> > > >   - no deadlocks (NFS mounted from localhost is riddled with them)
> > > 
> > > It is?  We had some low-memory problems a while back, but they got fixed. 
> > > During that work I did some nfs-to-localhost testing and things seemed OK.
> > 
> > Well, there's the "unsolvable" writeback deadlock problem, that FUSE
> > works around by not buffering dirty pages (and not allowing writable
> > mmap).  Does NFS solve that?  I'm interested :)
> 
> I don't know - first you'd have to describe it.

Actually, the right question is "how is fuse better than coda". I've
asked that before; unlike nfs, userspace filesystems implemented with
coda actually *work*, but do not provide partial-file writes.

								Pavel
-- 
teflon -- maybe it is a trademark, but it should not be.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/