[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <784B7DF1-6633-4356-80F2-A93A5A148F6A@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 15:47:33 +0100
From: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@....ac.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@...a.inka.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext3 vs NTFS performance
On 4 May 2007, at 10:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 09:12:31AM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
>> Nothing to do with win32 functions. Windows does NOT create sparse
>> files therefore it never can have an issue like ext3 does in this
>> scenario. Windows will cause nice allocations to happen because of
>> this and the 1-byte writes are perfectly sensible in this regard.
>> (Although a little odd as Windows has a proper API for doing
>> preallocation so I don't get why it is not using that instead...)
>
> Which means the right place to fix this is samba.
Absolutely, agreed.
> Samba just need
> to intersept lseek and pread/pwrite to never allocate sparse files
> but do the right thing instead. Now what the right thing would
> probably
> be a preallocate instead of writing zeroes, and we need to provide the
> infrastructure for them to do it, which is in progress currently.
> (And in fact samba already does the right thing for XFS if you use
> the prealloc samba vfs module, which AFAIK is not the default)
Best regards,
Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer, http://www.linux-ntfs.org/
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists