On 2011年10月28日 05:42, Theodore Tso Wrote: > > On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:08 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote: [snip] > One could argue that I could add a patch which disabled the bigalloc patch, and then make changes in the next merge window, but to be completely honest I have my own selfish reason for not wanting to do that, which is the bigalloc patches have also been integrated into Google's internal kernels already, and changing the bigalloc format without a new flag would make things complicated for me. Given that we decided to lock down the extent leaf format (even though I had wanted to make changes to it, for example to support a full 64-bit block number) in deference to the fact that it was in ClusterFS deployed kernels, there is precedent for taking into account the status of formats used in non-mainline kernels by the original authors of the feature. > Hi Ted, Forgive me if this is out of topic. In our test, allocating directories W/ bigalloc and W/O inline-data may occupy most of disk space. By now Ext4 inline-data is not merged yet, I just wondering how Google uses bigalloc without inline-data patch set ? Thanks. -- Coly Li -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
