Subject: Re: SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA support?
From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Jim Dennis <jimd@starshine.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20060302214929.GA16523@starshine.org>
References: <20060302214929.GA16523@starshine.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 03:33:16 -0500
Message-Id: <1141374797.3042.95.camel@mindpipe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 973
Lines: 23

On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 13:49 -0800, Jim Dennis wrote:
> 
>  I ask primarily because of the interplay between 64-bit systems and
>  things like /var/log/lastlog (which appears as a 1.2TiB file due to
>  the nfsnobody UID of 4294967294).
> 
>  (I'm realize that adding support for these additional seek() flags
>  wouldn't solve the problem ... archiving tools would still have to
>  implement it.  And I can also hear the argument that Red Hat and other
>  distributions should re-implement lastlog handling to use a more modern
>  and efficient hashing/index format and perhaps that they should set
>  nfsnobody to "-1" ... 

So the presence of very high UIDs causes lastlog to be huge?  That just
sounds like a RedHat bug.

Lee

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/