Hi, On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 07:13:12PM -0500, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > But even if you still consider it "essential," then XFS is a > _even_better_alternative_ to ReiserFS V3! In addition to its > dynamic inode allocation, XFS can store a small file's data in its > inode, for space savings (i.e. doesn't use a data block). ReiserFS > still requires you to eat a 4KB (or whatever the basic size is) data > block, No, reiserfs allows you to store the last non-block-aligned tail part of a file in the tree nodes themselves, rather than taking up a whole block. Reiserfs does definitely give you good small-file efficiency as a result. There are tail-merging patches for ext2 to do the same, btw. We've been looking at whether that can be adapted for ext3 extended attributes --- if so, we can get ext3 tails stored in an EA and achieve the same sort of space efficiency that reiserfs gains with its own tail merging. Cheers, Stephen
