[PATCH] Syncer rewriting

[Scott Long]

On Apr 16, 2010, at 2:23 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> 
>> - The standard syncer may be further improved getting rid of the
>> bufobj. It should actually handle a list of vnodes rather than a list
>> of bufobj. However similar optimizations may be done after the patch
>> is ready to enter the tree.
> 
> That would be the wrong direction: we need the bufobj because for instance
> a RAID5 geom module does not have a vnode for the parity data.
> 
> If you force the syncer to only work on vnodes, then we need a parallel
> mechanism for non-filesystem disk users.

It's been 5-6 (7?) years since you invented the bufobj, but I still haven't seen
anything in GEOM use it as you suggest.  You used to have a saying about
premature optimization...  I'd like to see Attilio's work move forward despite this.

Scott