> Peter Memishian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Anyone think maybe _FIOSATIME ioctl ought to be > supported on more > > > (ideally all) filesystems, and promoted from > private to something more > > > widely usable? Seems to me any really > transparent backup utility would > > > like to be able to do this, to not mess up atime > as a consequence of > > > backing up the file, nor ctime as a consequence > of restoring the > > > pre-backup atime. > > > > If we do decide to promote such a facility, I'd > hope we'd find a less ugly > > interface for it. > > What is is that you don't like?
I suppose there are a lot of ways the objective could be achieved. For example, an additional open() flag O_NOATIME to allow reading a file without modifying its atime. That would have the advantage that timestamps didn't need to be restored after-the-fact, so even an interrupted backup utility using that flag wouldn't mess up any timestamps. I do think that for the sake of not messing up forensics, even for a file owner to apply it to their own files should require an additional privilege. > What I like to see for any of the set time interfaces > for files is support > for nanoseconds. Agreed, since some other calls go down that fine, and some filesystems can store it. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
