key64_t? ino64_t?

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 02:07:14PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> Yah. And chris's work to use the native NT inode information will remove
> the chance of hash collisions completely. We will need with a 72 bit
> key_t, or a lookaside table. FWIW I think a lookaside table may not be
> worth the work (*). (I've changed my mind :})

Given the results I got from my NFS check (just posted to the cygwin ML),
it seems that we actually only need 40 bits for the inode number.  So
we should be fine with a 64bit key_t.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.