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, 25 Sep 2002 16:32:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:32:11 -0400 Received: from noodles.codemonkey.org.uk ([213.152.47.19]:4483 "EHLO noodles.internal") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:32:10 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:41:01 +0100 From: Dave Jones To: tytso@mit.edu Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BK PATCH] Add ext3 indexed directory (htree) support Message-ID: <20020925204101.GA5420@suse.de> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , tytso@mit.edu, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 04:03:44PM -0400, tytso@mit.edu wrote: > This patch significantly increases the speed of using large directories. > Creating 100,000 files in a single directory took 38 minutes without > directory indexing... and 11 seconds with the directory indexing turned on. Just curious.. what measurable overhead (if any) is there of indexing dirs with smaller numbers of files vs non-indexed ? If so, where would be the break-even point ? Dave -- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk | SuSE Labs