From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA771C433EF for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 10:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236541AbiESKQ5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2022 06:16:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50464 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229612AbiESKQz (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2022 06:16:55 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEC3836E31; Thu, 19 May 2022 03:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C1121B50; Thu, 19 May 2022 10:16:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1652955412; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=j926KAd1XQUpVbfgLiXlqXy2N+GLKRI2dNl67MjgX6Y=; b=ZZLa9R601zbvkxMvyDN8R3SO0lkwR2UtTLQj/pimOFDeyDEAAnopaNXt2/MgLOBW1qtuqm uvaGDDoK/0lo/gpBJIy+O07oT2C9uFWeABQ3Vq8zoaliLPk3ER9N3/MoZyklXeF7/i17zV JEeK3kS5BbgeMDMQQllQrFdcAY/Io5M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1652955412; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=j926KAd1XQUpVbfgLiXlqXy2N+GLKRI2dNl67MjgX6Y=; b=z9mhqTs1b1aur1iLk1QWTtJop90nTnL7xO5yo+lbsn7EnscSmsyTSr95P/RVeQUDHGWXKJ MEchdeRQgMvhWSAg== Received: from quack3.suse.cz (unknown [10.100.224.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 909D22C141; Thu, 19 May 2022 10:16:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by quack3.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3A8EDA062F; Thu, 19 May 2022 12:16:52 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 12:16:52 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Oleksandr Natalenko Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82?= Dec , reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara Subject: Re: Alternatives after removal of ReiserFS Message-ID: <20220519101652.iu5jbol2cjwr4y5c@quack3.lan> References: <54db8933-f2f3-d31a-c71f-860285e25abf@gmail.com> <2631780.mvXUDI8C0e@natalenko.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <2631780.mvXUDI8C0e@natalenko.name> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 19-05-22 11:20:24, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: > Hello. > > On středa 18. května 2022 14:10:25 CEST Michał Dec wrote: > > Does the Linux kernel actually offer any alternatives to users whose use > > cases are satisfied by ReiserFS? These users will probably be stuck with > > a much older kernel once ReiserFS is completely removed. I'm one of > > those users and I use ReiserFS to keep around large quantities of small > > files and quite ironically these are copies of the Linux kernel. I keep > > around 2, maybe 3 separate kernel trees to make sure the kernels I have > > on my devices can be rebuilt at any time. > > I think the advantage of using reiserfs for small files faded away over > time and became an old tale that is being passed from one generation to > another without any modern adequate testing. > > XFS should serve you well. Yes, so the space savings of tail packing e.g. for the kernel tree are likely still noticeable (my tree here has around half of the files with size below 4k). But given how cheap the storage is these days, people don't care as much. If space efficiency is important, it could be improved by using 1k blocksize for xfs or ext4. Also btrfs does packing of small files so for lots of small files it may be more space-efficient. And btrfs also supports transparent compression so that can reduce space usage for larger files even further. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR