On Aug 27, 2012, Sage Weil <[email protected]> wrote: >> + if (!in->old_inodes.empty()) { >> + snapid_t newfirst = in->old_inodes.rbegin()->first + 1; >> + if (newfirst > in->first) >> + in->first = newfirst;
> Hmm, did you observe a case where in->first was already > the newest > old_inode? No, that was just me doing defensive programming and forgetting to add a warning for this case ;-) IIRC I reasoned I didn't want an already-bugfixed or already-advanced in->first in the MDS journal to be overwritten with a buggy/outdated ->first from the inode proper. However, since I didn't put the warning, I don't know whether it ever hit :-( -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
