From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfsrestore: use utimensat() to provide atime/mtime with ns resolution
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 07:02:12 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140905110211.GA3208@laptop.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140905012404.GV20518@dastard>
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:24:04AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 08:04:51PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > On 9/4/14, 7:45 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > >On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:38:28PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > >>xfsdump encodes and stores the full atime and mtime for each file with
> > >>nanosecond resolution. xfsrestore uses utime() to set the times of each
> > >>file that is restored. The latter supports resolution of 1 second, thus
> > >>sub-second timestamp data is lost on restore.
> > >
> > >That doesn't seem like a big deal. What sort of problems does this
> > >actually cause?
> > >
> > >FYI, many linux filesystems only have second resolution timestamps
> > >and hence applications can't rely on sub-second timestamp resolution
> > >to actually mean anything useful....
> >
> > But why not restore the same resolution as is actually stored in the dump?
> > Throwing it away seems odd, and restoring it looks easy enough.
>
> Comes from a time when we couldn't restore what was in the dump. :/
>
> > In any case, there was a user who noticed & complained. Seems like a
> > very reasonable thing to fix, to me.
>
> Sure, but we don't make changes with the justification "just
> because". xfsrestore has had this behaviour since dump/restore was
> first introduced, so first we need to understand what the actual
> problem is. Was the user complaining because they noticed they were
> "different" in passing, or was it noticed because the difference is
> the root cause of some other problem?
>
No problems that I'm aware of. As Eric mentioned, it was noticed during
an evaluation of possible data transfer mechanisms for a glusterfs
setup. The user had to evaluate whether it would lead to any issues (a
geo-replication tracking thing I suspect) for a customer, but I hadn't
heard anything that suggested it was. The utime() call appears to be
obsolete as well, for whatever that's worth.
Brian
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-05 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-04 16:38 [PATCH] xfsrestore: use utimensat() to provide atime/mtime with ns resolution Brian Foster
2014-09-04 19:47 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-09-04 21:35 ` Brian Foster
2014-09-05 0:45 ` Dave Chinner
2014-09-05 1:04 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-09-05 1:24 ` Dave Chinner
2014-09-05 11:02 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2014-09-05 11:19 ` Greg Freemyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140905110211.GA3208@laptop.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox