From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from magic.merlins.org ([209.81.13.136]:55169 "EHLO mail1.merlins.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752623Ab2IJRpL (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 13:45:11 -0400 Received: from merlin by mail1.merlins.org with local (Exim 4.77 #2) id 1TB82o-0006SL-9S for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:45:10 -0700 Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:45:10 -0700 From: Marc MERLIN To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Symlink to a long filename "filename too long" error Message-ID: <20120910174510.GM5053@merlins.org> References: <20120910163406.GG5053@merlins.org> <20120910171630.GT17430@twin.jikos.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20120910171630.GT17430@twin.jikos.cz> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 07:16:30PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 09:34:06AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote: > > Due to some filesystem corruption on my source device, I had a very long file as a symlink > > target that btrfs wasn't able to recreate. > > Mind you, in this case it's clearly not something I need, but is it > > expected/known that ext4 can store longer filenames than btrfs? > > Btrfs can store symlink targets up to it's inline limit, 3917. xfs has > this limit hardcoded as 1024. ext4 has fast and non-fast symlink > storage, based on the target length, so it's able to store the maximum > PATH_MAX size into a full block for the non-fast case. Thanks for explaining. For normal use, 3917 seems more than adequate :) Marc -- "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R. Microsoft is to operating systems .... .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/