Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:21:34 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <15325.36894.320057.967406@caddis.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <24137.1004080687@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110260109050.8805-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <24137.1004080687@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >ufs has enough room to fix this.. > >there has been a field defined in the on disk inode for nanosecs > >in each of the time values... > >if we take the lowest 8 bits of that field and re-assign it to be > >the highest 8 bits of the seconds, then we have time accuracy down to > >microseconds still and we expand file times by a factor > >of 256 (which is all of recorded history plus some) > > > >we just always set those bits to 0 for the next 37 years and we don;t > >really lose time resolution and we gain compatibility with the future.. > >nothing these days has nonosecond resolution there anyhow.... Simply not true. We have pico second resolution in our product, which is necessary because we're using *really* fast transports, and need to do very precise timing. (We're not using FreeBSD now, but if we need that kind of resolution in 2001, I can easily see the need for much higher resolution in the future.) I'm with PHK here (can you believe it?). :) :) Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15325.36894.320057.967406>