Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:11:59 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: Ext2 defragmentation |
| |
Pavel Machek wrote: > > Isn't it better to simply use locate / updatedb instead ? > > No. There are other operations (such as du -s ., search from midnight) > which have find-like access pattern. And you have no chance of getting > out of date.
I have a dirent->d_type patch which I really should get on with submitting... Is anyone actually interested in it? It really speeds up this sort of operation. I have tested it with treescan.
OTOH, the fastest solution of all would be one that's as good as locate but always up to date. Why do you think I keep mentioning ways to propagate "directory changed" information up directory trees?
-- Jamie
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |