From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 07:52:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 07:52:19 -0500 Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([209.10.41.242]:20752 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 07:52:15 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 12:16:09 +0000 From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" To: Alexander Viro Cc: Andreas Dilger , Andreas Dilger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Ext2 development mailing list Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] Re: [RFC] ext2_new_block() behaviour Message-ID: <20010103121609.C1290@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <200101030147.f031lPa21470@webber.adilger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from viro@math.psu.edu on Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:37:50PM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:37:50PM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote: > Umm... OK, the last argument is convincing. Thanks... > > BTW, what was the reason behind doing preallocation for directories on > ext2_bread() level? We both buy ourselves an oddity in directory structure > (preallocated blocks become refered from the inode immediately and they > are beyond i_size) and get more complicated ext2_alloc_block(). What do > we win here? Having preallocated blocks allocated immediately is deliberate: directories grow slowly and remain closed most of the time, so the normal preallocation regime of only preallocating open files and discarding preallocation on close just doesn't work. --Stephen - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/