From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com ([192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m5ANw4tK032557 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:58:05 -0700 Received: from one.firstfloor.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id DC46A17AA72A for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from one.firstfloor.org (one.firstfloor.org [213.235.205.2]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2mmiEkuIBPW3O0QC for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <484F1541.7010203@firstfloor.org> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:58:57 +0200 From: Andi Kleen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: XFS directory entries sort order References: <200806101245.09950.dizzy@roedu.net> <87prqpp5q7.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Barry Naujok Cc: dizzy , xfs@oss.sgi.com > readdir order is not dependant on the hashes. The order depends on the > order of files being created, unlinked and the length of the filenames > being unlinked/created. Thanks for the correction. It's a long time that I read that source so it probably got confused with some other fs. -Andi