On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:30:40PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On May 01, 2007 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > Hmm, I'd thought "offline" would migrate to EXTENT_UNKNOWN, but I didn't
> >
> > I disagree - why would you
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 07:37:20PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On 1 May 2007, at 05:22, David Chinner wrote:
> >On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> >> The FIBMAP ioctl is for privileged users
> >> only, and I wonder if FIEMAP should be the same, or at least
On May 02, 2007 00:20 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> My point was that there is a difference between specification and
> implementation - if the specification says something is compulsory,
> then they must be implemented in the filesystem. This is easy
> enough to ensure by code review - we don't n
On May 01, 2007 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Hmm, I'd thought "offline" would migrate to EXTENT_UNKNOWN, but I didn't
>
> I disagree - why would you want to indicate the state is unknown when we know
> very well that it is
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:52:49PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> I think "rm -r" does a LOT of this kind of operation, like:
>
> stat(.); stat(foo); chdir(foo); stat(.); unlink(*); chdir(..); stat(.)
>
> I think "find" does the same to avoid security problems with malicious
> path manipulation.
This patch instruments the libext2fs unix I/O manager and adds bytes
read/written and data rate to e2fsck -tt pass/overall timing output.
Signed-off-by: Jim Garlick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: e2fsprogs+chaos/lib/ext2fs/unix_io.c
==
On May 01, 2007 11:28 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:01:42AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Except one other issue with online shrinking is that we need to move
> > inodes on occasion and this poses a bunch of other problems over just
> > remapping the data blocks.
>
>
On May 01, 2007 11:05 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> Speaking of SCM's, how wedded is Clustrefs to mercurial? I've been
> considering migrating e2fsprogs development to git, but one of the
> reasons I haven't is because I was concerned that might be incovenient
> for you folks.
Not at all, we just
On 1 May 2007, at 15:20, David Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 09:39:06PM -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
This is actually for future use. Any flags that are added into
On 1 May 2007, at 05:22, David Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
The FIBMAP ioctl is for privileged users
only, and I wonder if FIEMAP should be the same, or at least
disallow
mapping files that the user can't access especially with
FLAG_SYN
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:01:42AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Except one other issue with online shrinking is that we need to move
> inodes on occasion and this poses a bunch of other problems over just
> remapping the data blocks.
Well, I did say "necessary", and not "sufficient". But yes, m
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 01:56:41AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2007 11:22 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > One concern I still have is the fact that we're exposing a lot of
> > interfaces in libext2fs.so which are very specifically tied to the
> > current 48-bit physical/32-bit logica
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 09:39:06PM -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 14:22 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:44:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > This is actually for future use. Any flags that are added into this
> > > range must be understood by
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 16:36 +0530, Aneesh Kumar wrote:
> On 4/24/07, Avantika Mathur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ext4 Developer Interlock Call: 04/23/2007 Meeting Minutes
> >
> > TESTING
> > - extents testing
> > - Discussed methods for testing extents on highly fragmented
> > filesystems.
>
On Apr 30, 2007 11:22 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> One concern I still have is the fact that we're exposing a lot of
> interfaces in libext2fs.so which are very specifically tied to the
> current 48-bit physical/32-bit logical on-disk extent data structure.
> If/when we add support for the 64/64-
15 matches
Mail list logo
