From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Drokin Subject: Re: Horrible ftruncate performance Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 04:16:45 +0400 Message-ID: <20030723001645.GB8032@namesys.com> References: <200307151848.59027.Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de> <20030715170540.GA1213@namesys.com> <3F1D69AC.5040302@namesys.com> <1058892649.5042.29.camel@tiny.suse.com> <3F1D7DD8.3010806@namesys.com> <1058898249.2749.2.camel@tiny.suse.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1058898249.2749.2.camel@tiny.suse.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Chris Mason Cc: Hans Reiser , Dieter N?tzel , Szakacsits Szabolcs , Carl-Daniel Hailfinger , reiserfs-list@namesys.com Hello! On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 02:24:09PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > Heh, everything needs to be zero defect ;-) But I completely agree > about not adding new item types or other format changes. Still, > non-extent filesystems can create holes faster than we can, so it is > worth talking about ways to fix it (within the constraints of existing > code). Yeah, we really can insert items with the actual data in the tree (as I already discussed with Chris). (No, not one item per one pointer, that will be messy). That should work, I think. No, that won't hurt reiser4, because the key strenght of the reiser4 is the throughput and online repacker. Today the Linus have proclaimed that he really needs the online repacker because he got tired by inter-file fragmentation (as opposed to in-file fragmentation) and he really looks forward for someone who can deliwer XP-like feature of grouping data based on the previous read-patterns. Bye, Oleg