[reiserfs-list] RE: [OpenAFS-devel] weird issue with reiserfs on 2.4.3 and openaf s

[Neulinger, Nathan]

>  > Right! That's why I was asking about putting the fallback 
> back in. It can't
>  > hurt anyone if it isn't used, and in this case, it's not a terribly
>  > inefficient operation, since the ideal AFS cache is 
> dedicated to the task. 
> 
> reiserfs 3.5 fallback would not work. Or rather it would intolerably
> inefficient (in reiserfs, inode can be looked up given two 
> 32bit numbers:
> unique objectid and objectid of parent directory (mostly). 
> Fallback just
> scans *all* possible parent objects ids and there may be billions of
> them).
> 
> What I meant is some special code, that knows objectid 
> (==inode numbers)
> of afs cache dirs and uses this knowledge to speed search up. 
> Forgive my
> complete incompetence on afs.

Actually, in the ideal case of an AFS cache being on it's own filesystem,
there should only be 1 directory on the whole filesystem (and maybe
lost+found), which is why it ran fine on 3.5.

-- Nathan