[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] file extents for EXT3
    On Aug 11, 2003  08:53 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
    > Changing the underlying disk format without bumping the filesystem
    > revision is a hugely bad idea. I disagreed with merging htree (even
    > though its backward compat) without bumping the filesystem version, too.
    > Vendors, distributors, OEMs, etc. all test against existing on-disk
    > formats, when they release their products. When the filesystem format
    > for an existing filesystem, in production, changes underneath them, they
    > tend to get worried and annoyed. So, to all ext developers,
    > Please add <it> to ext4 not ext3!

    Ext2/3 uses feature flags instead of version numbers to indicate such
    changes. Version numbers are a poor way of indicating whether a change
    is compatible or not compared to feature flags. For example, if you bump
    the minor number to indicate a "compatible" change it means that any
    code that pretends to support version x.y features also needs to support
    all features <= y and all features <= x.

    If you really want to have a feature number to be happy, just think of


    as something like a version number and you will nearly be happy.

    Cheers, Andreas
    Andreas Dilger

    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 13:47    [W:0.020 / U:7.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site