lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: why is the size of a directory always 1024b ?
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Khimenko Victor wrote:

>> I want to know if there is any significant reason why the size of
>> each directory ( ext2fs) is reported as 1024b ( or a multiple of
>> 1024).

> Why not ? It's real size of directory ! You have other ideas ?

Macrohard did - all directories were reported with size 0 !!!

I can also report that on my 4k block systems, I never see directories
smaller than 4k in size, but that's (A) expected, and (B) desired.

I can understand the viewpoint that says the "size" of a directory is
simply a count of the number of valid entries therein, but I don't
agree with it.

Best wishes from Riley.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
* ftp://ftp.MemAlpha.cx/pub/rhw/Linux
* http://www.MemAlpha.cx/kernel.versions.html


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.137 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site