Re: [RFC] Improved inode number allocation for HTree

From: Helge Hafting <helgehaf@aitel.hist.no>
To: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Improved inode number allocation for HTree
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 14:00:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E6DDDD2.3050709@aitel.hist.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3E6DBE3B.8030007@namesys.com

Hans Reiser wrote:
> Let's make noatime the default for VFS.
> 
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
[...]
>> If I were able to design Unix over again, I'd state that if you don't 
>> lock a directory before traversing it then it's your own fault if 
>> somebody changes it under you, and I would have provided an interface 
>> to inform you about your bad luck.  Strictly wishful thinking.  
>> (There, it feels better now.)

I'm happy nobody _can_ lock a directory like that.  Think of it - unable
to create or delete files while some slow-moving program is traversing
the directory?  Ouch.  Plenty of options for DOS attacks too.
And how to do "rm *.bak" if rm locks the dir for traversal?

Helge Hafting