Re: The argument for fs assistance in handling archives (was: silent semantic changes with reiser4)

From: Jamie Lokier (jamie_at_shareable.org)
Date: 09/02/04

  • Next message: Krzysztof Halasa: "Re: Dual-Ethernet DECchip 21142/43 doesn't like cold boots" 
    Date:	Thu, 2 Sep 2004 22:47:31 +0100
To: Christer Weinigel <christer@weinigel.se>

    Christer Weinigel wrote:
    > Can be done with dnotify/inotify and a cache daemon keeping track of
    > mtime. Yes, this will need a kernel change to make sure mtime always
    > changed when the file changes, but it does not require anything else.

        - Can the daemon keep track of _every_ file on my disk like this?
          That's more than a million files, and about 10^5 directories.
          dnotify would require the daemon to open all the directories.
          I'm not sure what inotify offers.

        - What happens at reboot - I guess the daemon has to call stat()
          on every file to verify its indexes? Have you any idea how long
          it takes to call stat() on every file in my home directory?

        - The ordering problem: I write to a file, then the program
          returns. System is very busy compiling. 2 minutes later, I
          execute a search query. The file I wrote two minute ago doesn't
          appear in the search results. What's wrong?

          Due to scheduling, the daemon hasn't caught up yet. Ok, we can
          accept that's just hard life. Sometimes it takes a while for
          something I write to appear in search results.

          But! That means I can't use these optimised queries as drop-in
          replacements for calling grep and find, or for making Make-like
          programs run faster (by eliminating parsing and stat() calls).
          That's a shame, it would have been nice to have a mechanism that
          could transparently optimise prorgrams that do calculations....

    Do you see what I'm getting at? There's building some nice GUI
    and search engine like functionality, where changes made by one
    program _eventually_ show up in another (i.e. not synchronously).

    That's easy.

    And then there's optimising things like grep, find, perl, gcc,
    make, httpd, rsync, in a way that's semantically transparent, but
    executes faster _as if_ they had recalculated everything they
    need to every time. That's harder.

    > > 3. Email program scanning for subject lines fast:
    >
    > Same here.
    >
    > > 4. Blog server caching built pages:
    > > 5. Programming environment scanning for tags:
    > > 6. File transfer program scanning for shared deltas.
    >
    > And so on.

    No, not 3, 4 or 6. For correct behaviour those require synchronous
    query results. Think about 6, where one important cached query is
    "what is the MD5 sum of this file", and another critical one, which
    can only work through indexing, is "give me the name of any file whose
    MD5 sum matches $A_SPECIFIC_MD5". Trusting the async results for
    those kind of queries from your daemon would occasionally result in
    data loss due to race conditions. So you wouldn't trust the async
    results, and you fail to get those CPU-saving and bandwidth-saving
    optimisations.

    -- Jamie
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: Krzysztof Halasa: "Re: Dual-Ethernet DECchip 21142/43 doesn't like cold boots"

    Relevant Pages