[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [reiserfs-dev] Re: Block I/O Enchancements, 2.5.1-pre2
Nikita Danilov wrote:

>Hans Reiser writes:
>Having 64 bit inode numbers is good, but we *can* live without them:
>currently inode hash table can store inodes with identical inode
>numbers, provided they can be distinguished by find_actor. Inode numbers
>are just first fast guess during table scan, if they coincide,
>find_actor is used.

Nikita is entirely correct, 32 bits of inode number hash is plenty.

64k blocks remain a solution whose potential drain on memory bandwidth
worries me.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.099 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site