From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Oct 26 9:31:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (c421509-a.pinol1.sfba.home.com [24.7.86.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AA6737B403 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 09:31:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA11014; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:49:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:49:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Terry Lambert Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , Peter Wemm , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. In-Reply-To: <3BD98B6A.DED6D38F@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG considering that we didn't have ANY sub-second resolution for a long time I think that looking for sub microsecond resolution on access times is pointless at this time.. In any case, if you just take the top 2 bits you still have nanosec resolution, and 400 years either way. that at least should give us time to migrate to other filesystems and get all active machines retired.. (which is actually the issue, assuming that at some time in the future all new systems will be created with UFS2). On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > Your proposal would leave us with quarter-microsecond resolution, > > and I'm pretty sure I can beat that to pulp in the next 10 years > > on a RAM disk... > > > > There is no harm in having to run a rev on the UFS/FFS on-disk format, > > when you hav 37 years to complete it. > > Or 10 years, if we go Julian's way. > > -- Terry > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message