From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: ext2/3 subdirectory limit [WAS: Choosing and tuning Linux file systems] Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:25:01 -0600 Message-ID: <20060626162501.GS5817@schatzie.adilger.int> References: <20060625220052.GX19196@goober> <20060626111024.GB3114@harddisk-recovery.com> <20060626123635.GA15200@fspc268> <20060626125435.GA3911@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Tomas Hruby , Erik Mouw , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:48265 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750770AbWFZQZE (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:25:04 -0400 To: Theodore Tso Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060626125435.GA3911@thunk.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Jun 26, 2006 08:54 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > We could create an rocompat feature which disabled this, or which > causes st_nlink above 32000 to mean "infinity"; such patches have > existed, but in practice it's relatively rare that people actually > find this to be a limitation, so none of the patches have managed to > achieve the necessary activation energy to actually get integrated > into both the kernel and e2fsprogs. Ted, can you please assign an official RO_COMPAT flag for this feature? CFS has such patches that we should submit. All that is needed is which flag should be used. While you are there, please also assign an RO_COMPAT flag for NS_TIMESTAMP patch I recently submitted, and INCOMPAT_64BIT for > 32-bit blocknr patches. There is also EXT3_HUGE_FILE_FL and RO_COMPAT_HUGE_FILE for Takashi's "i_blocks in fs-blocksize units" patch. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc.