On 05-May 11:10, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2002, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> As you can probably guess, this sort of thing is one of the issues that
> my "COUGAR" proposal corrects. I leave design issues to the designers,
> but one thing I insist on is that there *be* requirements --
> *documented* requirements -- and a *documented* and debated design
> *before* hacking the code into the kernel and making implementation
...and here is where you sliped the track. Linux is designed by those
who post patches and lobby for thier use. If something doesn't work for
you post *patches* that fix it. Complaints that you don't have time to
work around current code gets you nothing.
As far as I can see, the reason that staticis now live in
/proc/partitions is that there was code _submitted_ (the sar patches)
to collect the staticis. If you have a better patch I, for one, would
love to see it. I don't think IO statistics shareing /proc/partitons
is great *design* but it was thought it would break the least tools
> Of course, since I would be the designer of at least part of "COUGAR", I
> would be making some of those decisions. Unfortunately, I have limited
> time to work on "COUGAR" until maybe late July, so if someone wants to
> pick up some of the balls and run with them, I'm willing to unload them.
> (Apologies if my metaphor jars those of you who live where football is
> played without the use of hands :).
> This is a process I highly recommend for performance-determining parts
> of Linux, like memory management and the scheduler. I know the memory
> management and scheduler gurus -- Rik, Andrea, Ingo and others -- *have*
> designs in their heads, *have* requirements that they're working to -- I
> just think we should be sharing and debating *those* on the list instead
> of just code and benchmark results.
Everyone loves the debate, but if no code is ever show all we get out of
it _is_ the debate. How many times has this happened on this subject
(widely taken as the /proc/* debate)? I've seen lots of hot air, but
Just my take,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 07 2002 - 22:00:25 EST