Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:58:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:58:42 -0500 Received: from felix.convergence.de ([212.84.236.131]:59783 "EHLO convergence.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:58:28 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:59:18 +0100 From: Felix von Leitner To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [rfc] Near-constant time directory index for Ext2 Message-ID: <20010223015918.A28372@convergence.de> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3A948F7B.E40C81D5@transmeta.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i In-Reply-To: ; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:35:34AM +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Thus spake Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk): > > > There will be a lot fewer metadata index > > > blocks in your directory file, for one thing. > > Oh yes, another thing: a B-tree directory structure does not need > > metadata index blocks. > Before people get excited about complex tree directory indexes, remember to > solve the other 95% before implementation - recovering from lost blocks, > corruption and the like And don't forget the trouble with NFS handles after the tree was rebalanced. Trees are nice only theoretically. In practice, the benefits are outweighed by the nastiness in form of fsck and NFS and bigger code (normally: more complex -> less reliable). Felix - 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/