efficiency over NFS
extproxy at gmail.com
Thu Mar 6 17:33:43 GMT 2008
I don't know NFSv4 well. I do know though that it is not as widely deployed
as NFSv3. Even Netapp (which is the leader in NFS appliances) still sells
NFSv3 solutions as far as I know.
That said, in general it seems to be a bad idea to issue a 'stat' on every
file in the workspace whenever a 'bzr status' or a 'bzr commit' is done.
Different people seem to have different opinions on this - I personally
would much rather prefer that 'bzr' not rely on the performance of the
underlying filesystem so heavily. That's why I'm proposing the 'edit'
command as an option - whoever likes it can use it, rest can just use bzr
the way it works currently.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:51 AM, John Yates <jyates at netezza.com> wrote:
> Correct me if I am wrong, but did not NFSv4 address the issue of stat
> If that is the case then this scenario applies only to those using older
> versions of NFS. The number of shops creating these highly NFS-based
> environments, wanting to adopt cutting edge dvc technology, and yet
> unwilling to avail themselves of the benefits of NFSv4 must be rather
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bazaar