Re: [PATCH-v2 0/5] add support for a lazytime mount option

J. Bruce Fields
2014-11-24T22:13:58Z

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 06:57:27AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> If we want to be paranoid, we handle i_version updates non-lazily; I
> can see arguments in favor of that.
>
> Ext4 only enables MS_I_VERSION if the user asks for it explicitly, so
> it wouldn't cause me any problems. However, xfs and btrfs enables it
> by default, so that means xfs and btrfs wouldn't see the benefits of
> lazytime (if you're going to have to push I_VERSION to disk, you might
> as well update the [acm]time while you're at it). I've always thought
> that we *should* do is to only enable it if nfsv4 is serving the file
> system, and not otherwise, though, which would also give us
> consistency across all the file systems.

I guess you need to worry about the case where you shutdown nfsd, modify
a file, then restart nfsd--you don't want a client to miss the
modification in that case.

--b.