Re: Nanosecond fs timestamp support: sad
From: J. Bruce Fields
Date: Fri Jul 22 2011 - 19:49:32 EST
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 07:06:12PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 08:59:15AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > But does anyone apart from NFSv4 actually *want* i_version as opposed to the
> > more-generally-useful precise timestamps?
> It *seems* like a generally useful idea, but I don't know of any other
(Out of curiosity: what actually *needs* real timestamps?:
- They're generally useful to people, of course; ("what did I
change last tuesday?")
- Make uses them, though in theory perhaps it could do the same
job by caching records like "object X was built from
versions a, b, and c of objects A, B, and C respectively".
But a lot of uses are probably just to answer the question "did this
file change since the last time I looked at it"?
Of course, however theoretically useful, there's always the argument
that linux-specific interfaces are unlikely to be used by anyone except
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/