[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061214015212.GA30071@fieldses.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 20:52:12 -0500
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
Alexandre Ratchov <alexandre.ratchov@...l.net>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org
Subject: Re: rfc: [patch] change attribute for ext3
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 06:24:28PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Sep 13, 2006 14:11 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > I would really have preferred a full-blown 64-bit counter as per
> > RFC3530, but I suppose we could always combine this change attribute
> > with the high word from ctime in order to make up the NFSv4 change
> > attribute. That should keep us safe until someone develops a ramdisk
> > with < 1 nsecond access time.
>
> Trond, can you please elaborate on the need for a 64-bit version counter
> for NFSv4?
I'm not Trond, but....
> What kind of requirements does NFSv4 place on the version? Monotonic is
> probably a good bet.
The only requirement is that it be unique (assuming a file is never
modified 2^64 times). Clients can't compare them except for equality.
> Does it need to be global for the filesystem
Nope.
> or is a per-inode version sufficient?
Yes.
> What functionality of NFSv4 needs the version?
Clients use it to revalidate their caches.
--b.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists