Re: [rfc] Near-constant time directory index for Ext2

H. Peter Anvin
2001-02-21T23:58:21Z

Followup to: <971i36$180$1@penguin.transmeta.com>
By author: torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> (The current VFS name hash is probably _really_ stupid - I think it's
> still my original one, and nobody probably ever even tried to run it
> through any testing. For example, I bet that using a shift factor of 4
> is really bad, because it evenly divides a byte, which together with the
> xor means that you can really easily generate trivial bad cases).
>

Actually, the VFS name hash I think is derived from the "Dragon Book"
hash (via autofs), so it's not like it's completely untested.

-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."