Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 12:41:36 -0500 From: "Rick C. Petty" <rick-freebsd@kiwi-computer.com> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Space-saving of UFS1 Message-ID: <20060609174136.GA42457@megan.kiwi-computer.com> In-Reply-To: <200606091330.10007.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> References: <20060609065656.31225.qmail@web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200606091313.04913.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <4489ADC9.3090809@samsco.org> <200606091330.10007.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 01:30:09PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > Aren't the ACLs recorded in the inodes -- which would explain, why those are > twice larger in UFS2? Thanks! No, the disk inode (/usr/include/ufs/ufs/dinode.h) contains only pointers to the external attributes block(s). The primary reason UFS2 dinodes are larger than UFS1 are the conversion from 32 to 64 bit pointers and a few extra time structures (e.g. the inode creation time). If your files are minimally 1GB in size, I would think you would need UFS2 for the larger pointers. -- Rick C. Petty
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060609174136.GA42457>