(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Atkinson <kevin_at_atkinson.dhs.org> writes: > > Kevin> Instead of treating partly retrieve files as file fragments > Kevin> or blocks why not simply treat them as that. That is > Kevin> instead of insisting upon retrieving the whole file simply > Kevin> retrieve the part requested and mark the file as partly > Kevin> retrieve on the client and just the client. The server > Kevin> does not need to worry about which parts the client has, it > Kevin> only has to worry that it has some parts thus simplifying > Kevin> things greatly. > > Not really; the server already does not worry about what the client > has (the client may have gone disconnected, remember). How has the client gone disconnected? I never said that. > The complexity > Jan is describing is entirely client-side. The problem is that > programs expect "reliable stream" semantics as well as "random access > block device" semantics from files, and your scheme emphasizes random > access to blocks at the expense of stream reliability. What exactly do you mean by "reliable stream"? > Consider: with current Coda design you can drive a CD-RW from an image > on the Coda FS (assuming a pretty unloaded or very fast system). With > your design, I think not. Actually SMB over 100 GB network works just fine for for burning a CD image over the network. I have done it several times before. > From your requirements, it sounds to me like what you are describing > as ideal is something like WebDAV I will have a look but I think I will stick with my current system of manually copying files around. -- http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.orgReceived on 2002-10-16 01:51:32