From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:36:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:36:07 -0500 Received: from marine.sonic.net ([208.201.224.37]:21825 "HELO marine.sonic.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:35:55 -0500 X-envelope-info: Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:34:52 -0800 From: Mike Castle To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] disk throughput Message-ID: <20011105233452.C8276@thune.mrc-home.com> Reply-To: Mike Castle Mail-Followup-To: Mike Castle , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3BE77599.9CFB5CA9@zip.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 09:48:40PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I'm not saying it's a bad heuristic - it's probably a fine (and certainly > simple) one. But the thought that when the NFS server has problems, a > straight "cp -a" of the same tree results in different layout just because > the server was moved over from one network to another makes me go "Ewww.." The layout is most likely going to be different anyway, isn't it? We don't know what has gone on in the past to get the FS into the current state. But now we have more information than we did when the file system was originally built. We don't have an extent based interface do we? So we can't say "I know this file is going to be X bytes in size." But if we accomplish nearly the same thing by a quick copy like this, what's the harm? mrc -- Mike Castle dalgoda@ix.netcom.com www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc