Messages in this thread | | | From | "Stefan Monnier" <monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu> | Subject | knfsd (was: Why khttpd is a bad idea) | Date | 18 Jun 1999 12:01:54 -0400 |
| |
>>>>> "Rik" == Rik van Riel <riel@humbolt.nl.linux.org> writes: > Not that I completely disagree with you, but I'm just > curious if you think the same way about knfsd...
Obviously, I (for one) do. I can see the need for kernel support for NFS, but it should be limited to semantics issue (fhopen or inodeopen seems necessary at least, maybe a few others). unfs wasn't all that much slower than knfs and the few points where it was it was due to the massive copying that sendfile and the new page cache are supposed to reduce/eliminate. The other problem was lack of threadedness, but this shouldn't be unsolvable either.
Stefan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |