---- 在 星期一, 2021-03-29 23:13:52 Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> 撰写 ---- > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 12:17 PM Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Currently copy-up will copy whole lower file to upper > > regardless of the data range which is needed for further > > operation. This patch avoids unnecessary copy when truncate > > size is smaller than the file size. > > This doesn't look right. If copy up succeeds, resulting in a > truncated file, then we should return success there and then. Doing > the truncate again and failing (unlikely, but I wouldn't think it > impossible) wouldn't be nice. Hi Miklos I noticed a problem here, if we just return success after copy-up then mtime keeps the same as lower file. I think doing the truncate again would be better than manually updating the upper file's mtime. What do you think for this? Thanks, Chengguang
