xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Filestreams (and 64bit inodes)

To: Greg Banks <gnb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Filestreams (and 64bit inodes)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:06:04 -0500
Cc: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>, Richard Scobie <richard@xxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4851CD32.7080106@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <484B15A3.4030505@xxxxxxxxxxx> <484CA425.3080606@xxxxxxxxxxx> <484DDDB3.70000@xxxxxxx> <484F0998.90306@xxxxxxxxxxx> <484F2CD7.9070506@xxxxxxx> <484F452A.8090909@xxxxxxxxxxx> <48512A34.1020604@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4851CD32.7080106@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
Greg Banks wrote:
> Eric Sandeen wrote:

> Cool, thanks for the data Eric.
> 
>>  but it ain't pretty.
>>
>> I installed all fedora packages under a directory and ran greg's tool over:
>>
>> /sbin /usr/sbin /bin /usr/bin /usr/kerberos/bin/ /usr/kerberos/sbin/
>>
>> Aggregate results:
>>
>>    4070 29.1% are scripts (shell, perl, whatever)
>>    6598 47.2% don't use any stat() family calls at all
>>    1829 13.1% use 32-bit stat() family interfaces only
>>    1312  9.4% use 64-bit stat64() family interfaces only
>>     180  1.3% use both 32-bit and 64-bit stat() family interfaces
>>   
> Ouch.  That's over two thousand executables to patch, rebuild, and ship.
>> list of packages, sorted by the semi-lame "number of files in package
>> which call a 32-bit stat variant" metric:
>>
>> http://sandeen.fedorapeople.org/stat32-ers

And about 900 packages...

>> I'm going to see if I can't leverage Fedora to clean some of this up.
>>
>> -Eric
>>   
> Good luck with that.

Heh :)  At first I was just going to correlate with st_ino users to cut
it down, but then I learned that glibc will actually give you an
EOVERFLOW if, say st_ino overflows, even if you were only going to check
st_mode.  :(  So pretty much everything needs fixing.

(FWIW I gathered statfs/statvfs calls, too...)

-Eric



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>