On 09/19/2007 05:50 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Rene Herman wrote:
Well, not so sure about that. What if one of your expected uses for example is
video data storage -- lots of data, especially for multiple streams, and needs
still relatively fast machinery. Why would you care for the overhead af
_small_ blocks?
.. so work with an extent-based filesystem instead.
16k blocks are total idiocy. If this wasn't about a "support legacy
customers", I think the whole patch-series has been a total waste of time.
Admittedly, extent-based might not be a particularly bad answer at least to
the I/O side of the equation...
I do feel larger blocksizes continue to make sense in general though. Packet
writing on CD/DVD is a problem already today since the hardware needs 32K or
64K blocks and I'd expect to see more of these and similiar situations when
flash gets (even) more popular which it sort of inevitably is going to be.
Rene.
-
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
