Re: Question about optimal filesystem with many small files.

[oooooooooooo ooooooooooooo <hhh735@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> You can hash it and still keep the original filename, and you don't
> even need a MySQL database to do lookups.

There are an issue I forgot to mention: the original file name can be up top 1023 characters long. As linux only allows 256 characters in the file path, I could have a (very small) number of collisions, that's why my original idea was using a hash->filename table. So I'm not sure if I could implement that idea in my scenario.

>For instance: example.txt ->
> e7/6f/example.txt. That might (or might not) give you a better
> performance.

After a quick calculation, that could put around 3200 files per directory (I have around 15 million of files), I think that above 1000 files the performance will start to degrade significantly, anyway it would be a mater of doing some benchmarks.

Thanks for the advice.


_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos