On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
Simon Wilkinson wrote:
Rather than overloading existing fields (especially in the case of
returning two values bitpacked into MinQuota), I think it's more
valuable to consider the RPC changes necessary to support this as a
first class feature.
This is as expected ;-)
I will leave others to speak to the desirability of using the MinQuota
portion of the volume header - I've got no idea how widespread other
uses for this field may be.
While I am not opposed to the feature, I am opposed to overloading
existing fields.
I am curious whether the existing MinQuota field is used at all.
Why not reuse a field that is not used?
Re-using this field has the added advantage that the new on-disk format
is compatible with the old one. I.e. you can mix new and old servers.
The same applies to volume dumps.
-- Alf.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Alf Wachsmann | e-mail: [email protected]
SLAC - Scientific Computing | Phone: +1-650-926-4802
2575 Sand Hill Road, M/S 97 | FAX: +1-650-926-3329
Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA | Office: Bldg. 50/323
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~alfw (PGP)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
