On Mon, 13 November 2006 20:19:43 -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > I would agree that if the focus is on files that are 128 bytes or > smaller, storing the data in the inode makes the most sense. I don't > think it's worth the complexity to doing any kind of tail merging unless > you would expect that a large number of small files would be too big to > practically fit in the inode, but small enough that it is worth doing > something to store them efficiently. Symbolic links have been stored > this way for a long time. Logfs did this from the beginning, works like a charm. The only problem I see with this approach is that it is an incompatible change for existing filesystems. So using an old Knoppix CD to rescue a such a filesystem just won't work. Jörn -- Joern's library part 14: http://www.sandpile.org/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
