Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 20:54:47 +1100 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jez@netcraft.co.uk Subject: Re: Hard Link Count too small! Message-ID: <199703110954.UAA07451@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> >They must not be very POSIX dependent, or they would fail from the >>> >"shall mark for update"/"shall update" discrepancies introduced by >>> >the async mount. An async mounted FS is not POSIX compliant. An >>> >>> Wrong. >> >>"SHALL BE UPDATED". >> >>Not "SHALL BE WRITTEN TO CACHE AND MAYBE UPDATED SOMETIME". > >Right. Updating consists of converting a mark (which is usually >implemented as a single bit, e.g., IN_ACCESS in ufs) to a time. This has >nothing to do with caching. POSIX does not specify storage in RAM, PS: async mounting only has an indirect effect on writing timestamps to disk anyway. Timestamps are normally written to the diskwhen the update daemon syncs everything or as a side effect of writing inodes synchronously for reasons unrelated to timestamps. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703110954.UAA07451>