From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id oANDgr1o215798 for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 07:42:53 -0600 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 08:44:30 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] xfsrestore: check for compatible xfsrestore Message-ID: <20101123134430.GA30548@infradead.org> References: <20101116150502.179825893@sgi.com> <20101116150705.423217632@sgi.com> <20101117093842.GI17317@infradead.org> <4CE3F55C.9080902@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CE3F55C.9080902@sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Bill Kendall Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:31:40AM -0600, Bill Kendall wrote: > Just to be clear, the state information is used only for the life of > a series of restores. You restore your level 0 dump, then run restore > again on your level 1, and so on. After that the state information is not > used and would be deleted. > > Given how unlikely it is for someone to start a restore on one system > and continue it on another (incompatible) system, and since your suggested > change would ripple out into all the code that touches any of the on-disk > structures, I'd prefer to simply detect a change in the size of types. I > would think that recording/checking the size of a pointer would be > sufficient, assuming your main concern is type size differences between > 32-bit and 64-bit systems. Ok, still not nice, but no reason to revamp all of xfsdump due to this. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs