From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3 Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <1149816055.4066.60.camel@dyn9047017069.beaverton.ibm.com> <4488E1A4.20305@garzik.org> <20060609083523.GQ5964@schatzie.adilger.int> <44898EE3.6080903@garzik.org> <448992EB.5070405@garzik.org> <448997FA.50109@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrew Morton , ext2-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Dilger Return-path: To: Jeff Garzik In-Reply-To: <448997FA.50109@garzik.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: ext2-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Overall, I'm surprised that ext3 developers don't see any of the problems > > > related to progressive, stealth filesystem upgrades. > > > > Hey, they're used to it - they've been doing it for a long time. > > Agreed, but my argument is that extents are a Big Deal. I'm not arguing against you - I'm arguing with you. I just tried to explain what you saw as "surprising" - the fact that ext3 developers don't see this as a problem at all. They don't see it as a problem, because it's how they have always worked, since before ext3 was ext3, and it was just a crazy extension to ext2. And yes, it's a serious problem. Ext3 is pretty damn messy. It's not as messy as some, but it sure has potential. Linus