The 2006 Linux Filesystems Workshop (Part III)
Posted Jul 7, 2006 15:26 UTC (Fri) by PaulMcKenney
In reply to: The 2006 Linux Filesystems Workshop (Part III)
Parent article: The 2006 Linux Filesystems Workshop (Part III)
(1) OK, so in a sense, directories split across chunks in exactly the same way that files do, but for different reasons. Files split across chunks because they are large, while directories split across chunks because of the location of the primary inodes (or whatever a non-continuation inode is called) of the files within a given file. No replication. So one area that will require careful attention would be the performance of reading directories that had been split across chunks.
(2,3) Good to hear that rename and unlink are still atomic! I bet I am not the only one who feels this way. ;-)
(4) Also good to hear!
(5) Having specialized chunks could be a very good thing, though the administrative tooling will have to be -very- good at automatically handling the differences between chunks. Otherwise sysadmins will choke on it.
(6) OK to be incompatible, but my guess is that it will be very important to be able to easily migrate from existing filesystems to chunkfs. One good thing about current huge and cheap disks is that just migrating the data from one area of disk to another is much more palatable than it would have been a few decades ago.
(7) Good point -- I suppose that in the extreme case, a delayed allocation scheme might be able to figure out that the file is large enough to have whole chunks dedicated to its data.
to post comments)