Well, no worse than the original posting which had reiserfs supporting
something-EB files and 16TB filesystems. Don't think I didn't consider
this at the time of posting.
> > In reality, we will probably implement extent-based allocation for
> > ext3 when we start getting into filesystems that large, which has been
> > discussed among the ext2/ext3 developers already.
>
> It's nice to have a simple filesystem. If you turn ext2/ext3
> into an XFS/JFS competitor, then what is left? Just minix fs?
Note that I said ext3 in the above sentence, and not ext2. I'm not in
favour of adding all of the high-end features (htree, extents, etc) into
ext2 at all. It makes absolutely no sense to have a multi-TB filesystem
running ext2, and then the fsck time takes a day. It is desirable to
put some minimum support into ext2 for newer features when it makes
sense and does not complicate the code, but not for everything.
Cheers, Andreas
-- Andreas Dilger http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/