|
From: Steve F. <smf...@gm...> - 2023-09-30 14:51:01
|
On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 3:06 AM David Howells via samba-technical <sam...@li...> wrote: > > > Jeff Layton <jl...@ke...> wrote: > > > Correct. We'd lose some fidelity in currently stored timestamps, but as > > Linus and Ted pointed out, anything below ~100ns granularity is > > effectively just noise, as that's the floor overhead for calling into > > the kernel. It's hard to argue that any application needs that sort of > > timestamp resolution, at least with contemporary hardware. > > Albeit with the danger of making Steve French very happy;-), would it make > sense to switch internally to Microsoft-style 64-bit timestamps with their > 100ns granularity? 100ns granularity does seem to make sense and IIRC was used by various DCE standards in the 90s and 2000s (not just used for SMB2/SMB3 protocol and various Windows filesystems) -- Thanks, Steve |
