linux-kernel - Re: Ext3 vs NTFS performance

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: <E1HjjyF-00022D-00@calista.eckenfels.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 May 2007 00:40:19 +0200
From:	Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@...a.inka.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext3 vs NTFS performance

In article <20070503211450.GA3869@...ty> you wrote:
> For this particular case, Ted is probably right and the only place
> we'll ever see this insane poor man's pre-allocate pattern is from the
> Windows CIFS client, in which case fixing this in Samba makes sense -
> although I'm a bit horrified by the idea of writing 128K of zeroes to
> pre-allocate... oh well, it's temporary, and what we care about here
> is the read performance, more than the write performance.

What about an ioctl or advice to avoid holes? Which could be issued by
samba? Is that related to SetFileValidData and SetEndOfFile win32 functions?
What is the windows client calling, and what command is transmitted by smb?

Gruss
Bernd
-
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/