On 09/19/2007 05:50 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted text
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Rene Herman wrote:

quoted text
>> Well, not so sure about that. What if one of your expected uses for example is
>> video data storage -- lots of data, especially for multiple streams, and needs
>> still relatively fast machinery. Why would you care for the overhead af
>> _small_ blocks?
> 
> .. so work with an extent-based filesystem instead.
> 
> 16k blocks are total idiocy. If this wasn't about a "support legacy 
> customers", I think the whole patch-series has been a total waste of time.

Admittedly, extent-based might not be a particularly bad answer at least to 
the I/O side of the equation...

I do feel larger blocksizes continue to make sense in general though. Packet 
writing on CD/DVD is a problem already today since the hardware needs 32K or 
64K blocks and I'd expect to see more of these and similiar situations when 
flash gets (even) more popular which it sort of inevitably is going to be.

Rene.
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/