- 1. is this a bug or a feature? (score: 1)
- Author: james <jdickens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:44:36 -0600
- I was testing xfs out, so i wrote a script that created 2.3 million files in a directory, they were zero lenth files, them i deleted them, but now the file system is using 500megs, i figure this is
- /archives/xfs/2001-03/msg00219.html (7,140 bytes)
- 2. Re: is this a bug or a feature? (score: 1)
- Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:51:48 -0600
- It is a 'feature'. XFS does not preallocate space for inodes at mkfs time (ext2 for example does). Instead they are allocated on demand, but they are never given back. So once you hit a high watermar
- /archives/xfs/2001-03/msg00220.html (8,477 bytes)
- 3. is this a bug or a feature? (score: 1)
- Author: james <jdickens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:44:36 -0600
- I was testing xfs out, so i wrote a script that created 2.3 million files in a directory, they were zero lenth files, them i deleted them, but now the file system is using 500megs, i figure this is
- /archives/xfs/2001-03/msg00752.html (7,140 bytes)
- 4. Re: is this a bug or a feature? (score: 1)
- Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:51:48 -0600
- It is a 'feature'. XFS does not preallocate space for inodes at mkfs time (ext2 for example does). Instead they are allocated on demand, but they are never given back. So once you hit a high watermar
- /archives/xfs/2001-03/msg00753.html (8,477 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu