Re: fscache review comments, part 1

[Timothy Shimmin <tes@sgi.com>]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:30:17AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>> On Sep 28, 2006  17:45 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> 02-ino64-nfs.diff:
>>> 	Unfortunately there's a lot of broken userspace that can't deal
>>> 	with 64bit inode numbers, so you need to make the lod behaviour
>>> 	a mount option at least, probably even the default.  Given that
>>> 	we're going to run into problems like that it might make sense
>>> 	to make the option VFS-level instead of just in nfs.  (Note:
>>> 	XFS already has an option like that)
>> A general question - is there a known list of common applications that have
>> problems with 64-bit inodes?  It's been mentioned several times, but I'm
>> wondering if any effort is going toward fixing those apps so that 5 years
>> from now (or whenever) we CAN have 64-bit inodes.  If it relates to on-disk
>> formats like ustar, we can always work with something like star to ensure
>> that it is useful in the future.
> 
> The most important ones we've seen at SGI were various version of tar
> and many commercial backup applications that silently (!) lost data
> on restore with 64bit inode numbers.  I wasn't directly involved with
> those issue, but maybe some people that were at SGI at that time can
> fill in more details.

I wasn't involved with this much either, but I know people have
cited Networker a number of times.

--Tim