Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>