Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3

>>>>> Matthew Frost (MF) writes:

 MF> 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.

 MF> NUMA is designed to cope with a hardware feature, which not everybody
 MF> has.  Filesystem upgrades are not qualitatively similar; it does not
 MF> depend on one's hardware design as to whether one uses ext3, let alone
 MF> extents.  Your logic is faulty.

proposed 48bit extents patch addresses 2TB limit.


thanks, Alex