This proposal does look like it would be helpful. How does this kind
of proposal play out in terms of actually seeing the light of day in
deployed systems?
-Bradley
On 4/2/19 10:07 PM, bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:02:54AM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
The create itself needs to be sync, but the attribute delegations mean
that the client, not the server, is authoritative for the timestamps.
So the client now owns the atime and mtime, and just sets them as part
of the (asynchronous) delegreturn some time after you are done writing.
Were you perhaps thinking about this earlier proposal?
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dmyklebust-2Dnfsv4-2Dunstable-2Dfile-2Dcreation-2D01&d=DwIBAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=YIKOmJLMLfe5wQR3VJI7jGjCnepZlMwumApzvaKItrY&m=qlAJ6dZPGjbcTzNIpkTyk-RTii6lWw1CLIjF6jp3P2Y&s=aTTFNJlRH-dXrQmE4cSYEUd8Kv3ij5cqTJtvgIixMa8&e=
That's it, thanks!
Bradley is concerned about performance of something like untar on a
backend filesystem with particularly high-latency metadata operations,
so something like your unstable file createion proposal (or actual write
delegations) seems like it should help.
--b.
