[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Bas Wijnen
Subject: Re: On PATH_MAX
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 19:06:38 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11

On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 12:42:31PM -0500, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 18:12 +0100, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> > On 11/8/05, Christopher Nelson <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Eventually, some server needs to know the filename.  How else is the
> > > file mapped to its content?...
> > 
> > You can just read the symbolical name and present it to the user, or
> > search for an object with the name requested by the user.
> Please explain how to do this when the latency of the comparison and
> copy operations is unbounded.
> It can be done, but the file system in question is unable to make any
> reasonable specification of latency, and we are now done with any
> consideration of even soft real time for this file system.

IMO giving no reasonable specification of latency in a case where the process
supplies a real long filename is not a problem.  If the process cannot handle
it, it can limit the size itself.

However, the server must make sure that it does continue to handle other
requests while it works on this one, perhaps by implementing some scheduling
queue.  This is where the complexity comes in, which would be the reason to
avoid the whole thing if we do.


I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]