[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080822171959.GA30977@logfs.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:19:59 +0200
From: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To: Phillip Lougher <phillip@...gher.demon.co.uk>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, jaredeh@...il.com,
Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, tim.bird@...sony.com,
cotte@...ibm.com, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] AXFS: axfs_inode.c
On Fri, 22 August 2008 18:08:51 +0100, Phillip Lougher wrote:
>
> Squashfs stores significantly more metadata than cramfs. Remember
> cramfs has no support for filesystems > ~ 16Mbytes, no inode timestamps,
> truncates uid/gids, no hard-links, no nlink counts, no hashed
> directories, no unique inode numbers. If Squashfs didn't compress the
> metadata it would be significantly larger than cramfs.
Elsewhere in this maze of threads Arnd claimed to have tested the
benefits of metadata compression - and it making little impact.
My guess is that it would make a large impact if metadata would be a
significant part of the filesystem image. Usually metadata is close
enough to 0% to be mistaken for statistical noise. So compressing it
makes a significant impact on an insignificant amount of data.
Jörn
--
One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code.
-- Ken Thompson.
--
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