Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 22:54:33 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com> Cc: Kelly Yancey <kbyanc@posi.net>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu>, fs@freebsd.org, guptar@cs.rpi.edu Subject: Re: vnodes (UFS journaling)? Message-ID: <20020808055433.GG10953@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <20020808052109.GC47545@hollin.btc.adaptec.com> References: <3D51BE6F.298F0AF@mindspring.com> <20020807214625.C667-100000@gateway.posi.net> <20020808052109.GC47545@hollin.btc.adaptec.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com> [020807 22:25] wrote: > > I'll chime in and say that, as much as it pains me to admit, Terry is > right =-). Manipualting the journal file from the vnode layer is > the wrong way to go about this. However, if you want to push forward > in a quick-n-dirty manner right now, you could probably hack up > ufs_lookup() to not return a vnode for the journal file. Then you > can keep your reference on the vnode and not worry about contention. This is incorrect. UFS snapshots return vnodes for the snapshot files, it's just that the UFS code makes sure no one can write to these special files. To all those involved, if you want to help, please UTSL before leading people astray. :( -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020808055433.GG10953>