From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfs-utils: make auth_reload respect sub-second timestamps on etab Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:58:00 -0400 Message-ID: <20070426165800.GC4875@fieldses.org> References: <20070425173918.GB6696@salusa.poochiereds.net> <20070425180932.GC6696@salusa.poochiereds.net> <20070425201354.GD6696@salusa.poochiereds.net> <462FC850.7040600@oracle.com> <17968.12554.934818.359167@notabene.brown> <20070426120536.GB24800@dantu.rdu.redhat.com> <20070426162300.GA12193@salusa.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Neil Brown , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net To: Jeff Layton Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hh7IH-0004pd-ID for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:58:09 -0700 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214] helo=fieldses.org) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1Hh7IJ-0005Vc-1N for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:58:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20070426162300.GA12193@salusa.poochiereds.net> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 12:23:04PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > I've had a look at this, and even took a pretty broad swipe at doing it. The > issue here is that a lot of the existing code is not well geared toward having > an already-open filehandle that gets passed around. Changing this is going to > mean a pretty invasive patch that adds quite a few new functions. I don't feel > confident that this method has enough advantages over your earlier patch to > make this worthwhile. > > Neil, what do you think? Should I continue down this road, or should we just > go with what you've already written? Wouldn't you get the same benefit just by storing (and comparing) the inode number and mtime of etab, instead of just the mtime? --b. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs