Storing pipe opens in the share_mode db ?

[Gerald (Jerry) Carter]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:47:16AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
>> OK.  I'll respect that.  I don't agree, but I'll respect
>> it.  Where do you propose?  I don't want to have
>> create yet another tdb plus yet another set of fetch/store
>> functions for something that is essentially a file open.
> 
> Sorry. Why don't you agree ? The open file tdb is a critical
> choke point for file access. Contention there slows down the
> whole system. Adding pipe opens increases the contention. This
> is the kind of thing that only hurts on heavily loaded systems,
> but when it huts it *really* hurts.
> 
> Do you have numbers showing otherwise ? Let's get agreement
> on this first before we decide where to put the needed data.

Neither one of us have any numbers.  So it's kind of a futile
discussion.

I can stick the pipe opens somewhere else but it means that
a clustered Samba won't be able to support MMC correctly.
IMO introducing a new tdb increases the complexity of the
code.  And without numbers to prove otherewise it is hard
to tell the difference between reality and paranoia.  But I
respect your opinion since you have owned the file serving
code for longer than I've been out of college :-)





cheers, jerry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEiHKwIR7qMdg1EfYRAkr4AJ9X0ELWtPk+RWaVGL5RdMjaML0BYgCgk5x6
wo50EyAi81fjQpbdCz/7qG0=
=0N2O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----