Matteo Frigo writes:
> For the record, the nnmaildir mail backend in Gnus (an Emacs package
> for reading news and email) creates multiple hardlinks to the same
> file in the same directory. I had several thousands hardlinks at one
> time.
Gnus with nnmaildir is what I use. I wanted to test how
* [Tracy Reed]
> "clever" indeed. It creates filesystems with zillions of inodes which
> are a pain to work with. This is the sort of large storage application
> I would be looking to use btrfs for and apparently the currently
> implementation would croak.
As I understand it, the current impleme
Tracy Reed wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 08:29:02PM -0400, Matteo Frigo spake thusly:
Chris Mason writes:
Please keep in mind this is only a limit on the number of links to a
single file where the links and the file are all in the same directory.
For the record, the nnmaildir mail backend i
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 08:29:02PM -0400, Matteo Frigo spake thusly:
> Chris Mason writes:
>
> > Please keep in mind this is only a limit on the number of links to a
> > single file where the links and the file are all in the same directory.
>
> For the record, the nnmaildir mail backend in Gnus
Chris Mason writes:
> Please keep in mind this is only a limit on the number of links to a
> single file where the links and the file are all in the same directory.
For the record, the nnmaildir mail backend in Gnus (an Emacs package
for reading news and email) creates multiple hardlinks to the
> This hasn't been at the top of my list for a while, I remember a bunch
> of planning sessions where you weren't worried about it ;)
Yeah, no doubt. I go back and forth :)
- z
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.k
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:45:43AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
>
> >>> this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 272)
> >>> links in a directory
> >>
> >> what real-world application uses and needs this many hard links?
> >
> > I don't think that's a good counterargument for
>>> this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 272)
>>> links in a directory
>>
>> what real-world application uses and needs this many hard links?
>
> I don't think that's a good counterargument for why this is not a bug.
I strongly agree. Our ignorance of users operati
2009/10/12 John Dong :
>
> On Oct 12, 2009, at 12:16 PM, jim owens wrote:
>
>> Pär Andersson wrote:
>>>
>>> I just ran into the max hard link per directory limit, and remembered
>>> this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 272)
>>> links in a directory, so at least the BUG
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Chris Mason:
>>> Of course, not necessarily right now, but when you introduce some
>>> other changes needing disk format change, please think of removing
>>> the hard link limit as well.
>>
>> Please keep in mind this is only a limit on th
* Chris Mason:
>> Of course, not necessarily right now, but when you introduce some
>> other changes needing disk format change, please think of removing
>> the hard link limit as well.
>
> Please keep in mind this is only a limit on the number of links to a
> single file where the links and the f
jim owens wrote:
> Pär Andersson wrote:
snip...
> what real-world application uses and needs this many hard links?
I don't know about hundreds of thousands of hard links, but doesn't
busybox use large numbers of hard links in the same directories
(eg one for everything in /bin)?
jim owens wrote:
On Monday 12 October 2009, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 02:17:11PM -0400, jim owens wrote:
> > John Dong wrote:
> > >I don't think that's a good counterargument for why this is not a bug.
> >
> > it is not a "bug". hard links are not a required feature of all
> > filesystems nor i
I believe one hard-link should be the maximum.
berk
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
jim owens wrote:
Pär Andersson wrote:
I just ran into the max hard link per directory limit, and remembered
this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 272)
links in a directory, so at least the BUG() is fixed.
What is the reason for the limit, and is there any chance of
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 02:17:11PM -0400, jim owens wrote:
> John Dong wrote:
> >
> >I don't think that's a good counterargument for why this is not a bug.
>
> it is not a "bug". hard links are not a required feature of all
> filesystems nor is a defined large number required for those with
> har
John Dong wrote:
I don't think that's a good counterargument for why this is not a bug.
it is not a "bug". hard links are not a required feature of all
filesystems nor is a defined large number required for those with
hard links.
Can't think of any off the top of my head for Linux, but defin
Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
I don't know a software which need so many hard links. But it easy to find
some similar cases.
For example under my "/usr/bin" I have 478 _"soft links"_ to _different_
files.
Hard link is not used in place of soft link... soft link is
a different and preferred addi
On Oct 12, 2009, at 12:16 PM, jim owens wrote:
Pär Andersson wrote:
I just ran into the max hard link per directory limit, and remembered
this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not
272)
links in a directory, so at least the BUG() is fixed.
What is the reason for the
On Monday 12 October 2009, jim owens wrote:
> Pär Andersson wrote:
> > I just ran into the max hard link per directory limit, and remembered
> > this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 272)
> > links in a directory, so at least the BUG() is fixed.
> >
> > What is the rea
Pär Andersson wrote:
I just ran into the max hard link per directory limit, and remembered
this thread. I get EMLINK when trying to create more than 311 (not 272)
links in a directory, so at least the BUG() is fixed.
What is the reason for the limit, and is there any chance of increasing
it to s
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:07:43AM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> Yan, Zheng wrote:
>
> >>What is the reason for the limit, and is there any chance of increasing
> >>it to something more reasonable as Mikhail suggested?
> >
> >The limit is imposed by the format of inode back references. We can
Yan, Zheng wrote:
What is the reason for the limit, and is there any chance of increasing
it to something more reasonable as Mikhail suggested?
The limit is imposed by the format of inode back references. We can
get rid of the limit, but it requires a disk format change.
Please do get rid of
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Pär Andersson wrote:
> Mikhail Raskin writes:
>
>> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>>> BTW, what limit is that?
>>
>> 272 links. Creating 273-th link causes BUG(). The limit seems so
>> arbitrary that it maybe can be made higher.. 32-bit (billions o
Mikhail Raskin writes:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>> BTW, what limit is that?
>
> 272 links. Creating 273-th link causes BUG(). The limit seems so
> arbitrary that it maybe can be made higher.. 32-bit (billions of
> links) seem totally unrestrictive..
I just ran into the ma
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Chris Mason wrote:
As Yan said on IRC there's a limit to the number of hardlinks per file
in a given directory. We clearly need to change this from BUG() to
return a nice error.
BTW, what limit is that?
272 links. Creating 273-th link causes BUG().
Chris Mason wrote:
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 05:16:11PM +0400, Raskin Michael wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This is distinct from the old mass-symlinking warnings. I run a program
which promised to hardlink all the same-content files on the partition.
The failure occured re
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 05:16:11PM +0400, Raskin Michael wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> This is distinct from the old mass-symlinking warnings. I run a program
> which promised to hardlink all the same-content files on the partition.
> The failure occured reasonably q
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This is distinct from the old mass-symlinking warnings. I run a program
which promised to hardlink all the same-content files on the partition.
The failure occured reasonably quickly...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux)
C
29 matches
Mail list logo
