On Oct 27, 2002 20:16 -0300, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com> said:
> > 1) It would be good if it were possible to select this with a config
> > option (I don't care which way the default goes), so that people who
> > don't need/care about the increased resolution don't need the extra
> > space in their inodes and minor extra overhead. To make this a lot
> > easier to code, having something akin to the inode_update_time()
> > which does all of the i_[acm]time updates as appropriate.
>
> Please don't. Do not create incompatible versions of the same filesystem
> just because they were written on kernels compiled with different
> configurations. Superblock flags might be OK, but what is the point then?
> Better mount flags (mount with/without finegrained timestamps)?
I don't say anything about creating incompatible versions of the same
filesystem. Configuring out nsec timestamps is no different than what
we have today. Many filesystems do not support nsec timestamps anyways.
I just see this as one of many hundreds of "tiny" features that are
added to Linux that could easily be made a config option when they
are first added, but all just end up adding a tiny bit of bloat for
people that don't need it.
Cheers, Andreas
-- Andreas Dilger http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:37 EST