Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:02:09 +0000 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: UFS Subdirectory limit. Message-ID: <200503260902.ab77979@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 25 Mar 2005 22:10:18 EST." <20050326031018.GB41481@VARK.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> - make a new st_nlink field that's 32 bits and put it in the spare > 32-bit field in struct stat > - rename the old st_nlink to st_onlink and leave it at 16 bits > - the kernel would fill in st_onlink with max(st_nlink,SHORT_MAX) Hmmm - interesting - I hadn't realised there was spare space in struct stat. I guess we could get away with this and there's space in both ufs1 and ufs2 inodes. I think we'd need to redefinte nlink_t, which would need an ABI bump. One problem I can think of might be non-obvious failures of old programs on directories with lots of subdirectories. The hacky scheme ends up with a link count on 2 on all directories, which produces a reasonably obvious failure. David.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200503260902.ab77979>