On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:59:17 -0800
Jeremy Allison j...@samba.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:31:25PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:22:50 -0600
Steve French smfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Jeff Layton jlay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:10:12 -0400
Jeff Layton jlay...@redhat.com wrote:
Reduce false inode collisions by using the CreationTime like an
i_generation field. This way, even if the server ends up reusing
a uniqueid after a delete/create cycle, we can avoid matching
the inode incorrectly.
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:22:50 -0600
Steve French smfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Jeff Layton jlay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:10:12 -0400
Jeff Layton jlay...@redhat.com wrote:
Steve, can you clarify where we are with this patch? I originally
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:31:25PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:22:50 -0600
Steve French smfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Jeff Layton jlay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:10:12 -0400
Jeff Layton jlay...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:56:09 +0530
Suresh Jayaraman sjayara...@suse.de wrote:
On 06/28/2010 04:40 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
Reduce false inode collisions by using the CreationTime like an
i_generation field. This way, even if the server ends up reusing
a uniqueid after a delete/create cycle,
