From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo M. Correia Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:11:43 +0000 Subject: [Lustre-devel] Lustre HSM HLD draft In-Reply-To: <20080211181850.GA6552@webber.adilger.int> References: <47AB2FA7.10205@Sun.COM> <47AC7B75.30603@cea.fr> <20080211181850.GA6552@webber.adilger.int> Message-ID: <1202764303.6391.42.camel@localhost> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org Hi, On Seg, 2008-02-11 at 11:18 -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Feb 08, 2008 16:55 +0100, Aurelien Degremont wrote: > > But the touch could be problematic. Lustre gurus, is there another time > > field we could use instead ? Should we add a > > "last-modification-field-which-ignore-touch" ? Is this really a problem > > is we use display a "touched" time ? In this case, we display what the > > user set on the file, we suppose he did it in purpose. > > (snip) > > In ZFS I believe there is also a "last modified transaction group" (txg) > number stored with each dnode that could be used in a similar manner. Hmm.. I think ZFS only has zp_gen in the dnode/znode, which is the txg of the file creation. We also cannot use the txg birth time of the block where the dnode is stored because a metadnode block holds several dnodes. I may be missing something here, but isn't the "ctime" the appropriate value to use here? Regards, Ricardo -- Ricardo Manuel Correia Lustre Engineering Sun Microsystems, Inc. Portugal Phone +351.214134023 / x58723 Mobile +351.912590825 Email Ricardo.M.Correia at Sun.COM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 6g_top.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1257 bytes Desc: not available URL: