This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: key64_t? ino64_t?
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 07:09:24PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> Aliasing isn't bad. However: we *must* prevent clashes. Probability has
> nothing to do with it. I can't comment on the Linux implementation: I
> haven't reviewed it.
My Linux man page tells me:
Of course no guarantee can be given that the resulting
key_t is unique. Typically, a best effort attempt combines
the given proj_id byte, the lower 16 bits of the i-node
number, and the lower 8 bits of the device number into a
32-bit result. Collisions may easily happen, for example
between files on /dev/hda1 and files on /dev/sda1.
So Chuck's implementation is a multiple better than the Linux one
without the need to involve trees or tries.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.