On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros <n...@lsub.org> wrote:
> One problem I have with delayed clunks is that when you have caches or the
> like,
> close might fail. Not an issue on Inferno, but, I'd still like to be
> able to get back in sync
> at close time if only to be able to check that everything's ok and
> safe in the server.
>
Is that an argument for having the cache layer provide the service for
you? Apps that care about end-to-end semantics aren't likely to be
going through the cache layer anyways. Do we need differentiation
between "I don't care" clunks and "I care" clunks? What's the actual
spread of these in applications? Am I oversimplifying? That's quite
possible.
-eric
