xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] xfsrestore: check for compatible xfsrestore

To: Bill Kendall <wkendall@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] xfsrestore: check for compatible xfsrestore
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 08:44:30 -0500
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4CE3F55C.9080902@xxxxxxx>
References: <20101116150502.179825893@xxxxxxx> <20101116150705.423217632@xxxxxxx> <20101117093842.GI17317@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4CE3F55C.9080902@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:31:40AM -0600, Bill Kendall wrote:
> Just to be clear, the state information is used only for the life of
> a series of restores. You restore your level 0 dump, then run restore
> again on your level 1, and so on. After that the state information is not
> used and would be deleted.
> 
> Given how unlikely it is for someone to start a restore on one system
> and continue it on another (incompatible) system, and since your suggested
> change would ripple out into all the code that touches any of the on-disk
> structures, I'd prefer to simply detect a change in the size of types. I
> would think that recording/checking the size of a pointer would be
> sufficient, assuming your main concern is type size differences between
> 32-bit and 64-bit systems.

Ok, still not nice, but no reason to revamp all of xfsdump due to this.

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