Q: Mailbox format

[Taavi Burns]

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 12:42:47PM -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
> Not necessarily.  Improved optimization for lots of small files is something
> that could reasonably happen to the code supporting most any filesystem.

It could...but then you'd either have to go through huge data transformations
in memory and ensure that it syncs with disk all the time.  It sounds like
some of this has been done (I see reference to htree enhancements for
ext2/3).

Or you could just change the way it's all stored on disk, and do it smarter.
But then you'd have something more like reiserfs.  ;)

Traditional UNIX filsystems just don't handle thousands of files very well,
since they store directories as flat files.  Really, that's silly, and any
machinations to make this not a problem--but keeping them as flat files--is
just silly.

Note that reiser4 is pushing the envelope for what constitutes filesystem
operation.  It's starting to diverge heavily from the traditional UNIX
feel, while still maintaining enough of the look to be used by all legacy
applications.

http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html
http://www.namesys.com/benchmarks.html

-- 
taa

    Being subjected to physical attacks they are
    defenseless to fend off merely instills in them
    a "gut" conviction that children obviously merit
    neither protection nor respect.  This false message
    is then stored in the children's bodies as
    information and will influence their view of the
    world and their later attitude to their own children.
          --Alice Miller, Ph.D.
/*eof*/
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml