Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 23 Feb 1998 14:01:54 -0500 (EST) | | From | Rob Hagopian <> | | Subject | Re: VFS 64-bit clean |
| |
On Sun, 22 Feb 1998, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I wouldn't waste time trying to make amazingly clever ext2fs extensions > > playing with reserved/unused bits in the structures. My feeling is that > > the direction should be ext3fs (based on ext2fs) > > While talking about ext3. I do not think it should be ext2 based. I do > not like linear searching for files ext2 does. (I made directory with > ~3000 files and it go slooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwww, much too slow.) > > And - we need files >4G on ext2 *now*. Mj's smugfs is solution for us, > but other people probably would not like it, and it is _hack_.
I agree, ext2fs has some serious shortcomings performance wise if it were moved to 64-bit. However, the scope of that project is much too large to handle and be done in a reasonable amount of time. I believe that there is an ext3fs project out and about right now (?) which is dealing with these issues. Personally, I'd support making a clean 64-bit ext3fs based directly off of ext2fs and moving the current ext3fs to ext4fs. The other advantage is that making a working 64-bit fs now (slow or not) can get the VFS layer 64-bit clean ASAP rather than waiting for a "better" 64-bit fs implementation. -Rob H.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
|  |