RE: block size in XFS = hard coded constant?

[Olaf Frączyk <olaf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 10:55, L A Walsh wrote:
> Right -- I know it isn't the filesystem block size.
> 
> In this day and age, it seems anachronistic.  Given the 10% higher block
> density, not only would it yield higher capacities, but should yield higher
> transfer rates, no?
> 
> I know it isn't a simple constant switch -- but I wouldn't want to switch
> constants since not all disks should be constrained to the same block size.
> 
> Do other file systems have the same limitation?  Are there any problems in the
> linux-kernel with non-512 byte blocks?
Hi, 

DVD-RAM (2048 bytes block size) works well in linux.
I use ext2 for DVD-RAM.

Regards,

Olaf Fraczyk