[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220830183244.GG26330@fieldses.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 14:32:44 -0400
From: bfields@...ldses.org (J. Bruce Fields)
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>,
"zohar@...ux.ibm.com" <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
"djwong@...nel.org" <djwong@...nel.org>,
"xiubli@...hat.com" <xiubli@...hat.com>,
"brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>,
"linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"neilb@...e.de" <neilb@...e.de>,
"david@...morbit.com" <david@...morbit.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"chuck.lever@...cle.com" <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
"linux-ceph@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ceph@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>,
"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"jack@...e.cz" <jack@...e.cz>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lczerner@...hat.com" <lczerner@...hat.com>,
"adilger.kernel@...ger.ca" <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
"walters@...bum.org" <walters@...bum.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] iversion: update comments with info about atime
updates
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 01:02:50PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> The fact that NFS kept this more loosely-defined is what allowed us to
> elide some of the i_version bumps and regain a fair bit of performance
> for local filesystems [1]. If the change attribute had been more
> strictly defined like you mention, then that particular optimization
> would not have been possible.
>
> This sort of thing is why I'm a fan of not defining this any more
> strictly than we require. Later on, maybe we'll come up with a way for
> filesystems to advertise that they can offer stronger guarantees.
Yeah, the afs change-attribute-as-counter thing seems ambitious--I
wouldn't even know how to define what exactly you're counting.
My one question is whether it'd be worth just defining the thing as
*increasing*. That's a lower bar.
(Though admittedly we don't quite manage it now--see again 1631087ba872
"Revert "nfsd4: support change_attr_type attribute"".)
--b.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists