xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Reduce XFS footprint (was Re: TAKE - remove a function xfs added to

To: "Ralf G. R. Bergs" <rabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Linux XFS Mailing List" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Reduce XFS footprint (was Re: TAKE - remove a function xfs added to filemap.c
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 18:52:30 +0100
Cc: "Stephen Lord" <lord@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <E16UW6R-0007K6-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <3C52DBBC.2060500@xxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 17:54 26-1-2002 +0100, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
That reminds me of another question I'm asking myself since a while: It seems
as if you're developing XFS for Linux from scratch instead of "just" porting
it from SGI. Is that right? Or why do you seem to change even fundamental code
pieces? Or does porting to Linux mean you have to rewrite it because it's so
different from IRIX?

Irix looks a lot like BSD which means that a lot of interfaces are completely different from linux. The algorithms are mostly the same but the kernel is sufficiently different that it needs a lot of work to make them play together. It is absolutely not a drop-in kernel mod.

I probably can't do that since as you know I use hardware RAIDs so I probably
need "big" filesystems, and I also need "big" files.

What steve meant was big from a linux standpoint. XFS bigfiles are 2^63. I don't how large files will become without this option though. You can't get further that 2TB anyways on linux.

Cheers

--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>