Posted changes for review, https://review.gluster.org/10425 https://review.gluster.org/10426 ~kaushal On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > After a long discussion (not really), we've concluded that a 64-bit > uint is really overkill for how we are using the generation number, > and I'll change it to a 32-bit uint. I'll send a change to do this > right away. > > The generation number we use is not permanent, it is valid only within > a GlusterD processe's lifetime. It starts fresh on every GlusterD > start. We don't save it or restore it. The generation number is bumped > for each peerinfo object allocated. Considering this, even if were to > do peer probes every second it'd be ages before we overflow with a > 32-bit generation number. If someone is somehow able to bombard us > with 4 billion requests, I expect GlusterD to bork before the > generation number ever reaches the overflow point. > > ~kaushal > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus <manu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 06:08:45PM +0530, Vijay Bellur wrote: >>> Let us retain support for 32-bit platforms. Though as developers we do not >>> run many tests on non 64-bit platforms, it would be not be good to break >>> compatibility for 32-bit platforms as we have many community users running >>> this >> >> That is a point in favor of not migrating NetBSD slave VM running >> regression to 64 bit systems. Keeping them as is will catch any >> 32 bit regressuin. >> >> -- >> Emmanuel Dreyfus >> manu@xxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
