From: tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: ext5 Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:44:33 -0500 Message-ID: <20100211064433.GF739@thunk.org> References: <20100210215028.GD739@thunk.org> <4B73931D.5000302@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Ron Johnson Return-path: Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:54564 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751650Ab0BKGoh (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:44:37 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B73931D.5000302@cox.net> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:18:21PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > >We currently don't have any plans for an "ext5". There might be some > >new features that might gradually trickle into ext4; for example > >there's someone who I may be mentoring who is interested in working on > >an idea I've had to add read-only compression to ext4. (Actually, the > >design I've sketched out makes 90% of the work be file system > >independent, so it's something that could be retrofitted into other > >filesystems: xfs, btrfs, etc.) > > I guess that means every file on the fs? No, I mean per-file compression, but a compressed file is immutable. This is basically what Mac OS X has recently added, and while I haven't looked at their implementation, Apple being one of those closed source companies and all, I wouldn't be surprised if they did things the same way. > Windows-like per-file compression would be darned useful in certain > circumstances. Big mbox files, for example. The problem with mbox files is that some mail readers try to smart about how they modify them to avoid needing to rewrite the whole mbox file; mutt will seak to the middle of the file, write to the end of the file, and then trim off any excess space by using the truncate system call. This is *hard* to support if the mbox file is compressed; you can do it using a stacker-style compression technique, but it's not as efficient, and it has a lot of complexity in the kernel. The idea with read-only compressed files is that they are useful for large executables or large static files, where compressing them means that it takes less time to read them off of an HDD. - Ted