Don't require distinguishing data and metadata for caching.

Another suggestion for implementation order.

From Godmar.

diff --git a/doc/filesys.texi b/doc/filesys.texi
index f245daa48ea1e6d592a86146ddddf9947ca9cffe..9ed836adbd34ef364ceb8fcad4d693078b1bfa6c 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/filesys.texi
+++ b/doc/filesys.texi
@@ -134,6 +134,9 @@ should pass the directory tests.
 Remaining miscellaneous items.
 @end enumerate
 
+You can implement extensible files and subdirectories in parallel if
+you temporarily make the number of entries in new directories fixed.
+
 You should think about synchronization throughout.
 
 @node Project 4 Requirements
@@ -316,7 +319,7 @@ older entry if necessary.  You are limited to a cache no greater than 64
 sectors in size.
 
 You must implement a cache replacement algorithm that is at least as
-good as the ``clock'' algorithm.  Your algorithm must also account for
+good as the ``clock'' algorithm.  We encourage you to account for
 the generally greater value of metadata compared to data.  Experiment
 to see what combination of accessed, dirty, and other information
 results in the best performance, as measured by the number of disk

diff --git a/ta-advice/HW4 b/ta-advice/HW4
index 5cf78d7885080603cf26d08b23cf859bccfad687..225c08b223241f3fa3f15f96f679821ccfa67d1a 100644 (file)
--- a/ta-advice/HW4
+++ b/ta-advice/HW4
@@ -497,8 +497,7 @@ C2:
 
     Many schemes are possible.  For full credit, students must use an
     algorithm that is at least as good as the second-chance (clock)
-    algorithm, and they must take the difference between data and
-    metadata into account in some way.
+    algorithm.
 
     Some implementations I've seen, with comments: