On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Michael Butash wrote:
> You know, I've heard the same argument against reiserfs for ages, and
> using it on countless servers (both home and enterprise) for at least
> the past 5 years I've _never_ once encountered unrecoverable reiser
> filesystem errors pertainin
Michael Butash wrote:
> You know, I've heard the same argument against reiserfs for ages, and
> using it on countless servers (both home and enterprise) for at least
> the past 5 years I've _never_ once encountered unrecoverable reiser
> filesystem errors pertaining to whatever kind of ungraceful/u
You know, I've heard the same argument against reiserfs for ages, and
using it on countless servers (both home and enterprise) for at least
the past 5 years I've _never_ once encountered unrecoverable reiser
filesystem errors pertaining to whatever kind of ungraceful/ugly reboots
I've had to do. T
> Does anybody know what happens when you stash a huge number of tiny
> files in Ext4? Does it store them efficiently the way ReiserFS does?
No. Neither ext3 nor ext4 efficiently stores sub-block sized files.
The minimum files size granularity is the block size. The internal
fragmentation can h
Matt Graham wrote:
> From: Eric Shubert
>> IIRC, ext3 has a limit of 32k or so files in a folder.
>
> Not quite. There is a hard upper limit of 32768 subdirectories in a
> directory. If you're using a hashed dir index (which has been the
> default for a long time), you can have 100,000 to 1,000
From: Eric Shubert
> IIRC, ext3 has a limit of 32k or so files in a folder.
Not quite. There is a hard upper limit of 32768 subdirectories in a
directory. If you're using a hashed dir index (which has been the
default for a long time), you can have 100,000 to 1,000,000 files in
one directory wi
Michael Butash wrote:
> Sounds like you're reaching inode limitations or something, validate
> with 'sudo tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep "Free inode"'. You can change
> wtih tune2fs as well, at least with ext2/3, really haven't worked much
> with ext4 to know.
>
> I still stick with reiser mostly,
Sounds like you're reaching inode limitations or something, validate
with 'sudo tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep "Free inode"'. You can change
wtih tune2fs as well, at least with ext2/3, really haven't worked much
with ext4 to know.
I still stick with reiser mostly, it's a killer filesystem.
-mb
Jim March wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Does anybody know what happens when you stash a huge number of tiny
> files in Ext4? Does it store them efficiently the way ReiserFS does?
>
> I ask because I'm running into limitations on mailbox sized with
> Thunderbird and MBox, and was considering jumping to som
