Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:53:14 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3 |
| |
Michael Poole wrote: > Jeff Garzik writes: > >> Theodore Tso wrote: >>> And I'd also dispute with your "weren't really suited for the original >>> ext2-style design" comment. Ext2/3 was always designed to be >>> extensible from the start, and we've successfully added features quite >>> successfully for quite a while. >> Although not the only disk format change, extents are a pretty big >> one. Will this be the last major on-disk format change? > > You keep making "straw that broke the camel's back" type arguments > without saying why this particular straw (rather than the other > compatibility-breaking features that are already in ext3) is the one > that must not be allowed. Is it a matter of taste, or is there some > objective threshold that extents cross?
Yes, it's not a small change to the on-disk format.
If you write tools that read an ext3 filesystem, you won't be able to read file data at all, without updating your code.
That's a much bigger deal than say 32-bit uids.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |