[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:0.020 / U:4.312 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site