From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 15:19:27 +0200
From: Aharon Robbins <arnold@skeeve.com>
Message-Id: <200410171319.i9HDJR7R025520@skeeve.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] truncation via wstat on ken's fs
Topicbox-Message-UUID: ef5a643a-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> > Changing the length is easy, but giving back the no-longer-needed
> > blocks is messy, involving a recursive walk of the indirect blocks.
> > I'm tempted to just change the length, which gives the desired
> > user-visible effect, unless the side-effect of freeing the
> > unneeded storage is important to someone.
>
> Leaving the blocks there was the first thing I thought of.
> They will get reclaimed when the file is deleted anyway.
> Seems like a good idea to me.

Who says the file will ever get deleted?

Arnold