"Rene Gollent" <anevilyak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > wrote: > > BeOS/ZETA cache file, directory, and meta data in the same way > > using > > the block cache. The only problem of that cache is that a) it has a > > very limited block count, because b) it's not integrated with the > > VM at > Hmm, are you sure? I could've sworn someone asked about abysmal > performance with things like CVS on BeDevTalk once back in the day > and > jbq specifically said that R5 didn't cache dir blocks. He might also > have just meant BFS in particular, I could try and dig up that post > again, assuming it's survived 8 years later. If he said so he was wrong. There is no difference in Be's BFS between directory and file streams. This is different to our version, as our file cache doesn't yet support transactions, while our block cache has native support for them -- that's why we use the block cache for directory data, and the file cache only for files. Bye, Axel.