linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] ChunkFS: fs fission for faster fsck

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070425224710.GB16129@nifty>
Date:	Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:47:10 -0700
From:	Valerie Henson <val_henson@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Nikita Danilov <nikita@...sterfs.com>
Cc:	David Lang <david.lang@...italinsight.com>,
	Amit Gud <gud@....ksu.edu>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, riel@...riel.com, zab@...bo.net,
	arjan@...radead.org, suparna@...ibm.com, brandon@...p.org,
	karunasagark@...il.com, gud@....edu
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ChunkFS: fs fission for faster fsck

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:34:03PM +0400, Nikita Danilov wrote:
> 
> What is more important, design puts (as far as I can see) no upper limit
> on the number of continuation inodes, and hence, even if _average_ fsck
> time is greatly reduced, occasionally it can take more time than ext2 of
> the same size. This is clearly unacceptable in many situations (HA,
> etc.).

Actually, there is an upper limit on the number of continuation
inodes.  Each file can have a maximum of one continuation inode per
chunk. (This is why we need to support sparse files.)

-VAL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/