Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
Matthew Frost <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.file-systems,gmane.comp.file-systems.ext2.devel,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Alex Tomas wrote: >>>>>> Jeff Garzik (JG) writes: > > JG> Think about how this will be deployed in production, long term. > > JG> If extents are not made default at some point, then no one will use > JG> the feature, and it should not be merged. > > sorry, I disagree. for example, NUMA isn't default and shouldn't be. > but we have it in the tree and any one may choose to use it. NUMA is designed to cope with a hardware feature, which not everybody has. Filesystem upgrades are not qualitatively similar; it does not depend on one's hardware design as to whether one uses ext3, let alone extents. Your logic is faulty. the same > with extents. let's have it in. but let's make clear it's experimental, > it makes sense for large files only, it isn't backward compatible and > so on. > > thanks, Alex > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html