| To: | "Davida, Joe" <Joe_Davida@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs block size |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:38:52 +0100 |
| Cc: | "'linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx '" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <09D1E9BD9C30D311919200A0C9DD5C2C025370A4@mcaexc01.msj.maxtor.com>; from Joe_Davida@Maxtor.com on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:45:17AM -0700 |
| References: | <09D1E9BD9C30D311919200A0C9DD5C2C025370A4@mcaexc01.msj.maxtor.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:45:17AM -0700, Davida, Joe wrote:
> On the web page you sited, I read:
>
> "...We are using pages to cache metadata, pages are
> allocated one at a time, so each page sized chunk
> of memory usually is not adjacent in the address
> space to the page covering the next block of the
> disk."
>
> How does FreeBSD's UFS let you mkfs filesystems
> with 16K FS pagesize? It is on same X86 architecture
> as Linux!
But it is not Linux. They do organize things differently.
(Linux UFS support larger blocks too, but it seems pretty b0rken
currently)
Christoph
--
Whip me. Beat me. Make me maintain AIX.
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: xfs block size, Davida, Joe |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: xfs block size, Steve Lord |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: xfs block size, Davida, Joe |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfs block size, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |