From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: ext2/3 subdirectory limit [WAS: Choosing and tuning Linux file systems] Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 14:35:42 +0200 Message-ID: <1151325342.3185.34.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060625220052.GX19196@goober> <20060626111024.GB3114@harddisk-recovery.com> <20060626123635.GA15200@fspc268> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Erik Mouw , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:38377 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751108AbWFZMfp (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:35:45 -0400 To: Tomas Hruby In-Reply-To: <20060626123635.GA15200@fspc268> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org > What is the link_count (incremented by subdirectories) used for? Is it ext2/3 > specific or should it be implemented in such a way by other FS too? I am asking > becuse I see no reason why to do so in our FS. iirc some old unix tools (some versions of tar as well as other backup tools) use this.... don't ask me how/why ;) I only remember getting bugreports at one point about this count being wrong ;)