jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (The Beach Bum) (12/22/88)
In article <15106@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes: >In article <10211@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US> jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US >(The Beach Bum) writes: >>[directory libraries might] display quadratic file system behavior >>[ or worse ;-) ] ... > >(And *that* is the real problem, not the side issues several others >have named. Nonetheless, `directory libraries' would probably be handy >during library development, and damn the scan time. When it gets too >bad, you give in and make the .a file. Or the .a groups....) Excellent suggestion. Ranlib'ing a library every few minutes as you debug modules is a serious pain - and of course the behavior is O(n**2), for those of us WITHOUT [ sigh ;-( ] name caches, or zillions of block buffers [ sigh ;-( ], directory flogging is a real loser. namei's per second is not a high number [ Version 7 file system being a total piece of garbage compared to Berzerkeley FFS. ] [ That's right - it's 2pm, where is YOUR i-list? ] And I do think I made some argument that below a certain size directory libraries made sense. So, Chris, when are you going to write the code? Better still - when can we expect to see FFS on a '386 box? -- John F. Haugh II +-Quote of the Week:------------------- VoiceNet: (214) 250-3311 Data: -6272 |"Unix doesn't have bugs, InterNet: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US | Unix is a bug" UucpNet : <backbone>!killer!rpp386!jfh +-- -- author forgotten --