From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rene Herman Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:41:52 +0200 Message-ID: <46F09A80.8020605@gmail.com> References: <20070911060349.993975297@sgi.com> <200709161853.12050.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <200709181116.22573.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20070918191853.GB7541@v2.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Nick Piggin , Christoph Lameter , Mel Gorman , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , William Lee Irwin III , David Chinner , Jens Axboe , Badari Pulavarty , Maxim Levitsky , Fengguang Wu , swin wang , totty.lu@gmail.com, hugh@veritas.com, joern@lazybastard.org To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 09/18/2007 09:44 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Nobody sane would *ever* argue for 16kB+ blocksizes in general. Well, not so sure about that. What if one of your expected uses for example is video data storage -- lots of data, especially for multiple streams, and needs still relatively fast machinery. Why would you care for the overhead af _small_ blocks? Okay, maybe that's covered in the "in general" but its not extremely oddball either... Rene.