[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: On PATH_MAX
From: |
Jonathan S. Shapiro |
Subject: |
Re: On PATH_MAX |
Date: |
Tue, 08 Nov 2005 11:34:56 -0500 |
On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 17:18 +0100, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 11/8/05, Christopher Nelson <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > And why does the server need to check the filename? In what way?
> >
> > Assuming that the server's service requires the filename (perhaps it is
> > a filesystem server, or perhaps it is a photo album server... Both
> > services are equivalent in this example.) then of course it has to
> > process the filename. At some point someone has to actually process the
> > filename. Otherwise there's no point in having it.
>
> The name is for you to know what is in the file. The server does not
> need the name to know that.
Perhaps. But in order to store the name the server must allocate storage
and copy the name. Even if the only "processing" is the copy step, this
is still a step with no known operational bound on latency.
shap
- RE: On PATH_MAX, (continued)
- RE: On PATH_MAX, Christopher Nelson, 2005/11/08
RE: On PATH_MAX, Christopher Nelson, 2005/11/08
- Message not available
- On PATH_MAX, Michal Suchanek, 2005/11/08
- Re: On PATH_MAX, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/11/08
- Re: On PATH_MAX, Bas Wijnen, 2005/11/08
- Re: On PATH_MAX, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/11/08
- Re: On PATH_MAX, ness, 2005/11/09
- Re: On PATH_MAX, Bas Wijnen, 2005/11/09
- Re: On PATH_MAX, ness, 2005/11/09