From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030258AbWFIRCE (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:02:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030222AbWFIRCC (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:02:02 -0400 Received: from [80.71.248.82] ([80.71.248.82]:23187 "EHLO gw.home.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030238AbWFIRCA (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:02:00 -0400 X-Comment-To: Linus Torvalds To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Alex Tomas , Jeff Garzik , Andrew Morton , ext2-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3 References: <1149816055.4066.60.camel@dyn9047017069.beaverton.ibm.com> <4488E1A4.20305@garzik.org> <20060609083523.GQ5964@schatzie.adilger.int> <44898EE3.6080903@garzik.org> <448992EB.5070405@garzik.org> From: Alex Tomas Organization: HOME Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 21:04:08 +0400 In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Fri, 9 Jun 2006 09:54:49 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org oops :) I don't follow that well ... size of in-core inodes is a different problem. thanks, Alex >>>>> Linus Torvalds (LT) writes: LT> On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> Just as an example: ext3 _sucks_ in many ways. It has huge inodes that >> take up way too much space in memory. LT> Btw, I'm not kidding you on this one. LT> THE NUMBER ONE MEMORY USAGE ON A LOT OF LOADS IS EXT3 INODES IN MEMORY! LT> And you know what? 2TB files are totally uninteresting to 99.9999% of all LT> people. Most people find it _much_ more interesting to have hundreds of LT> thousands of _smaller_ files instead. LT> So do this: LT> cat /proc/slabinfo | grep ext3 LT> and be absolutely disgusted and horrified by the size of those inodes LT> already, and ask yourself whether extending the block size to 48 bits will LT> help or further hurt one of the biggest problems of ext3 right now? LT> (And yes, I realize that block numbers are just a small part of it. The LT> "vfs_inode" is also a real problem - it's got _way_ too many large LT> list-heads that explode on a 64-bit kernel, for example. Oh, well. My LT> point is that things like this can make a very real issue _worse_ for all LT> the people who don't care one whit about it) LT> Linus