[lkml]   [2000]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: ext2 directory size bug (?)
On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 12:14:34AM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote:

Not really. Anything that modifies directories holds both ->i_sem and
->i_zombie, lookups hold ->i_sem and emptiness checks (i.e. victim in
rmdir and overwriting rename) hold ->i_zombie, readdir holds both.

what performance issues does this raise in the cast of a directory
with _many_ files in it -- when we are renaming often involving that

I ask this because certain MTAs do just that; and when you have
10,000 to 100,000 messages queued I immagine you might spend much of
your time waiting for ->i_sem locks?

Truncating is a piece of cake. Repacking is not a good idea,
though, since you are risking massive corruption in case of dirty
shutdown in the wrong moment.

ext2 directories seem somewhat susepctable to corruption on badly
timed shutdowns anyhow; and I don't think there is any way to do
atomic writes to them with most disk hardware is there?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:51    [W:0.030 / U:9.940 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site