From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krzysztof Halasa Subject: Re: [PATCH] multi item packed files Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:28:17 +0200 Message-ID: References: <200504211113.13630.mason@suse.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Chris Mason , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 21 21:25:36 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DOhHT-0007HY-91 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:24:07 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261809AbVDUT2Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:28:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261810AbVDUT2Y (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:28:24 -0400 Received: from khc.piap.pl ([195.187.100.11]:16132 "EHLO khc.piap.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261809AbVDUT2W (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:28:22 -0400 Received: by khc.piap.pl (Postfix, from userid 500) id 7AA3C1082A; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:28:18 +0200 (CEST) To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:41:12 -0700 (PDT)") Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds writes: > Wrong. You most definitely _can_ lose: you end up having to optimize for > one particular filesystem blocking size, and you'll lose on any other > filesystem. And you'll lose on the special filesystem of "network > traffic", which is byte-granular. If someone needs better on-disk ratio, (s)he can go with 1 KB filesystem or something like that, without all the added complexity of packing. If we want to optimize that further, I would try doing it at the underlying filesystem level. For example, loop-mounted one. -- Krzysztof Halasa