Re: defrag deployment status (was Re: [PATCH] ext4: allow defrag (EXT4_IOC_MOVE_EXT) in 32bit compat mode)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

jim owens wrote:

I think  my logic is still correct, although I wished I had said "closer 
to the middle."  In fact, simplistic ideas for placement of files are 
unlikely to produce fabulous results (and that includes placing commonly 
used files towards the middle of the disk, say at the inside edge of the 
outermost zone.)  The effort that BSD went to in FFS, placing 
directories with files and meta-data in cylinder groups, illustrates 
that disk performance is a sophisticated problem.

Why don't we use BSD FFS/FFS2?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] ext4: allow defrag (EXT4_IOC_MOVE_EXT) in 32bit co ..., Christian Borntraeger, (Sun Mar 7, 1:32 pm)
Re: defrag deployment status (was Re: [PATCH] ext4: allow ..., Christian Borntraeger, (Mon Mar 8, 12:53 am)
Re: defrag deployment status (was Re: [PATCH] ext4: allow ..., Christian Borntraeger, (Mon Mar 8, 9:00 am)
Re: defrag deployment status (was Re: [PATCH] ext4: allow ..., Valdis.Kletnieks, (Mon Mar 8, 12:38 pm)
Re: defrag deployment status (was Re: [PATCH] ext4: allow ..., David Newall, (Tue Mar 9, 9:19 am)
[PATCH resend] ext4: allow defrag (EXT4_IOC_MOVE_EXT) in 3 ..., Christian Borntraeger, (Fri Mar 12, 12:01 am)