On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 10:57 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:34 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > ... or stop using > > _mdfd_getseg() for this so that you can remove segments independently > > without worrying about sync requests for other segments (it was > > actually like that in an earlier version of the patch for commit > > 3eb77eba, but someone complained that it didn't benifit from fd > > caching). > > Not sure which approach I prefer yet, but here's a patch showing that > alternative.
Here's a better version: it uses the existing fd if we have it already in md_seg_fds, but opens and closes a transient one if not.
0001-Don-t-use-_mdfd_getseg-in-mdsyncfiletag-v2.patch
Description: Binary data
