Re: ReiserFS in Standard Kernel?
Stuart Lynne (sl@gateway.fireplug.net)
14 Jul 1999 18:32:34 GMT
In article <Pine.LNX.4.10.9907140959190.13999-100000@labyrinth.logic.net>,
Edward S. Marshall <emarshal@logic.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Horst von Brand wrote:
>> "Edward S. Marshall" <emarshal@logic.net> said:
>> > Anyone running a reasonably high-traffic news server these days threw out
>> > the one-file-per-article storage method a long time ago. It just doesn't
>> > scale to 30-40G per day.
>>
>> But that means extra hair in the server. If the OS can take that over,
>> everybody wins, even those that didn't go the extra mile to implement their
>> own filesystem since the OS's sort of sucks for their application.
>
>Agreed, but I can still do better with a userspace solution.
But there are applications that could share an almost as good solution in the
kernel if it was available. This has been the traditional trade off in comp
sci for years. Save your time/money using a generic solution or achieve a
performance benefit by using a custom solution.
Just because for your application you are willing to spend the extra time
don't assume everyone else will for all other applications.
--
Stuart Lynne <sl@fireplug.net> 604-461-7532 <http://edge.fireplug.net>
PGP Fingerprint: 28 E2 A0 15 99 62 9A 00 88 EC A3 EE 2D 1C 15 68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/