One thing to consider when you do a btree: creation of btrees is expensive,
if most of your data is transient in a directory, btrees don't help performance,
neither if you're just doing linear dumps of a directory. Btrees only help
in the name->number conversion, if you are processing a directory in linear order
they will slow things down.
--Perry
>
> tytso wrote:
> > Another way of asking the question is --- of those people who complain
> > that it takes too long to look up a filename in a directory: while Linux
> > is looking up a filename in a large directory, is Linux disk bound or
> > CPU bound? If Linux is being disk bound, there are much better
> > solutions that don't necessarily require a B-tree.
>
> CPU bound, as Dean Gaudet (sp?) later notes. Running INN as a news server
> (in the stock version) you could easily wind up with a directory containing
> 200,000 or more files in 24 hours.
>
> Running your find command would kill our news server, but I'll see if I can
> do it on the machine's off hours or soemthing. :)
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
>
-- Perry Harrington Linux rules all OSes. APSoft () email: perry@apsoft.com Think Blue. /\- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu