On Aug 23, 2013, Gregory Farnum <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Alexandre Oliva <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Aug 22, 2013, "Yan, Zheng" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> This is not bug. Only the tail entry of the path encoded in the parent >>> xattrs >>> need to be updated. (the entry for inode's parent directory) >> >> Why store the others, if they're not usable, then? IMHO it just >> introduces a risk of their being accidentally misused.
> We want to write a correct path whenever we touch the file, but we > don't want to have to go out to each file's object in order to > complete a directory rename. So for a given file object we consider > only the immediate parent to be authoritative, but keep around the > full path for disaster recovery. Ok, so all this extra info is for disaster recovery only. I guess that makes some sense to me, as long as that's clear to everone who might want to tap on that info. > If we are touching the file's ancestor xattr and not updating the > whole thing, that would be a bug, but I don't think that's what you're > describing? It was not, indeed. Thanks for the clarification. -- 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
