Mail Archives: opendos/1997/02/07/14:42:43
On Thu, 6 Feb 1997 22:09:29 -0600 (CST) "Colin W. Glenn"
<cwg01 AT gnofn DOT org> writes:
>And every time the driver dies, you access the drive, and smack
>yourself
>as the lag of the software, discovering a gravestone instead of a
>driver,
>resurrects the driver before accessing the drive. So you boost the
>life
>of the driver, which then consumes more resources waiting to die
>again.
>
>Good idea.
Do I detect a hint of sarcasm?
And yet a cacheing system operates on EXACTLY the same principle - access
what's needed when needed, dump it when it hasn't been accessed for a
while. Alternatively, you could have a set number of systems loaded at
once, this would be equivelant to having cache lines, dumping them when
new data is read in, et cetera.
So, say, you set a max of 2 drivers loaded at once. If all you ever use
is FAT and ext2fs, then no problem - you'd never have a lag. If you
have, say 10 drives mounted with a different fs on each, you could
encounter a lag - but how many people run a program that accesses 10
different drives at once? There are certainly flaws in this system, and
their are strengths. Personally I like it better than being limited to
FAT, and I'd like to hear if there are any REAL reasons this couldn't be
done.
...Chambers
>
>
- Raw text -