Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:26:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:26:22 -0500 Received: from h24-65-192-120.cg.shawcable.net ([24.65.192.120]:55026 "EHLO webber.adilger.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:26:10 -0500 From: Andreas Dilger Message-Id: <200103012123.f21LNNL30827@webber.adilger.net> Subject: Re: Hashing and directories In-Reply-To: <3A9EB984.C1F7E499@transmeta.com> from "H. Peter Anvin" at "Mar 1, 2001 01:05:08 pm" To: "H. Peter Anvin" Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 14:23:23 -0700 (MST) CC: Alexander Viro , Pavel Machek , Bill Crawford , Linux Kernel , Daniel Phillips X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org H. Peter Anvin writes [re hashed directories]: > I don't see there being any fundamental reason to not do such an > improvement, except the one Alan Cox mentioned -- crash recovery -- > (which I think can be dealt with; in my example above as long as the leaf > nodes can get recovered, the tree can be rebuilt. Actually, with Daniel's implementation, the index blocks will be in the same file as the directory leaf nodes, so there should be no problem in losing leaf blocks after a crash (not more so than the current ext2 setup). Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto, \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert - 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/