Jasper Bryant-Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > This could be done fairly trivially with FUSE, and IMHO is a good use > for FUSE because since you're just throwing most data away, performance > is not a concern.
Q.: how much work would fuse have to do until the user file system server could decide to ignore the data? A.: pretty much all of a cached write including all the copies and context switches. That is because FUSE has to first hand all the data to the server until it can decide to do nothing and that's pretty much all (and then some more) of the cost of a cached write. So if you want any performance benefit from this (I'm a little sceptical) you should exactly not use FUSE. The basic problem with the idea is that programs who create temporary files usually want to read them back at some point too. So if you throw everything away things break. If you just don't want the write to not (usually) hit disk you can use tmpfs, although I believe at least ext2 (not ext3 unfortunately) is also reasonably good at not writing out very short lived files. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
