From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Yan, Zheng " Subject: Re: Mass-Hardlinking Oops Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 06:43:19 +0800 Message-ID: <3d0408630910111543t23bdf6c3u2274efc65f0fe06c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A74401B.90801@mccme.ru> <20090803145741.GC3765@think> <4A76FB78.5000207@wpkg.org> <20090803235920.C13173@mccme.ru> <87my3y3r8u.fsf@faran.nsc.liu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E4r_Andersson?= Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87my3y3r8u.fsf@faran.nsc.liu.se> List-ID: On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:05 PM, P=E4r Andersson wrote: > Mikhail Raskin writes: > >> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: >>> BTW, what limit is that? >> >> 272 links. Creating 273-th link causes BUG(). The limit seems so >> arbitrary that it maybe can be made higher.. 32-bit (billions of >> links) seem totally unrestrictive.. > > I just ran into the max hard link per directory limit, and remembered > this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 27= 2) > links in a directory, so at least the BUG() is fixed. The max number of hard link is depend on total length of hard link names. > > What is the reason for the limit, and is there any chance of increasi= ng > it to something more reasonable as Mikhail suggested? The limit is imposed by the format of inode back references. We can get rid of the limit, but it requires a disk format change. Regards Yan, Zheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" = in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html