Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754552Ab0GaSGF (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:06:05 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:50284 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752172Ab0GaSGC (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:06:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/18] xstat: Add a pair of system calls to make extended file stats available [ver #6] From: utz lehmann To: David Howells Cc: Linus Torvalds , Jeremy Allison , Volker.Lendecke@sernet.de, Jan Engelhardt , linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsde@jasper.es In-Reply-To: <3533.1280595212@redhat.com> References: <1280524978.2452.9.camel@segv.aura.of.mankind> <20100715021709.5544.64506.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20100715021712.5544.44845.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <30448.1279800887@redhat.com> <3533.1280595212@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 20:05:21 +0200 Message-ID: <1280599521.2720.5.camel@segv.aura.of.mankind> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 (2.30.2-4.fc13) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:Iqg48vk1nJf7qO8w5wODv3p51p4+12h08E8YYCYA3gM 6m4Dz0dB7LaaE2epbiD66vvw06N+TKWOF4ss35unLxPI2IOVkx 2LZjCjLpRDXzCyi/5VRQnsyfia3mWoadRVJWa1BJWhNypjbuIN 7U7kAXVckdv7X7QXN8PRYh9Bjnf7y7thALjJesCTPG49dhqL98 GDv5hDXtq1fB0v4jjyDxA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 835 Lines: 22 On Sat, 2010-07-31 at 17:53 +0100, David Howells wrote: > utz lehmann wrote: > > > When abusing an existing time stamp use atime not ctime please. > > ctime has it's uses. atime was just a mistake and is nearly useless. > > CacheFiles currently uses atime to determine least-recently-usedness. How does this works right with noatime or relatime (which is default)? We had used FS-Cache with a few 10000s files cached. Doesn't it mean that the cleanup has to stat them all? Why didn't cachefilesd managed the cache index in a separate database like other caches? -- 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/