PATCH samba cache and read-ahead

Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Fri Jan 4 13:38:40 GMT 2008

On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 01:21:33PM +0000, Amin Azez wrote:
> > Yes, it's exactly that. Your advantage is that you don't
> > need to marshall anything on your own, and you don't have to
> > ask anybody for name space. Just invent a named pipe name,
> > run uuidgen and you're done with your local sandbox. In
> > theory you could even ride on one of the existing named
> > pipes, but this might be sub-obtimal.
> >   
> This sounds brillig. Do you have any URLs handy with practical tips, or
> any names of suitable existing named pipes for which I can examine the
> related source for tips?

Not really, sorry. You might look at the rpc-echo pipe and
its implementation.

> > Your disadvantage is that it has slightly higher processing
> > costs, and that you don't have the correct tid/fid context
> > around.
> Err.. that sounds unfortunate.
> Aren't RPC's calls made in the context of a TID?

Yes, IPC$.

> And my calls will be proxy to proxy and within the proxy be mapped to or
> from standard read/write calls anyway, so a propagatable FID should exist.

You could then embed the TID/FID in your calls, although
this would be quite a hack. But as your proxies have to
trust each other anyway, it might be ok.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the samba-technical mailing list