> I do believe you are trying to rationalize between NFS ver 2
> and ver 3, Linux right now does NFS v2 semantics - which
> according to the RFC does not allow caching. I believe I have
> seen snipets of code for NFSv3 circling around the kernel
> lately, so you should look into assisting the development of
> these efforts to address your client side caching concerns.
This is wrong. NFSv2 does allow for client-side caching, and the
write-gathering implemented on most servers gives a limited form of
server-side caching. The difference between NFSv2 and NFSv3 is that
the latter allows you to better control of the server-side caching:
the client has a way of telling the server that 'I've sent you all the
data I want you to write, please flush it to disk now'.
There is, however, still nothing in NFSv3 that breaks the idea of
statelessness.
Cheers,
Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/