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: <20070506205901.GA11665@lazybastard.org>
Date:	Sun, 6 May 2007 22:59:02 +0200
From:	Jörn Engel <joern@...ybastard.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@....ac.uk>,
	Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@...a.inka.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ext3 vs NTFS performance

On Fri, 4 May 2007 10:46:10 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> Which means the right place to fix this is samba.  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.

Why do preallocate and not just truncate the file?  If the write is a
single 0x00 somewhere beyond EOF, as appears to be the pattern, truncate
will do just as well if not better.  And it is available now.

Jörn

-- 
Joern's library part 6:
http://www.gzip.org/zlib/feldspar.html
-
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/