From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 10 01:24:48 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fs@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D728316A41B; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 01:24:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F02943D72; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 01:24:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5A1OThg041829; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 19:24:34 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <448A2116.3020504@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:32:06 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Watson References: <20060609065656.31225.qmail@web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200606091313.04913.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> <4489ADC9.3090809@samsco.org> <200606091330.10007.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> <4489BD63.7060309@samsco.org> <20060610004447.A26068@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20060610004447.A26068@fledge.watson.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: Mikhail Teterin , fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Space-saving of UFS1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 01:24:48 -0000 Robert Watson wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Scott Long wrote: > >> The inode size was extended from 128 bytes to 256 bytes to allow for >> 64-bit block pointers. This includes 12 direct block pointers and one >> pointer for each of the single, double, and triple indirect blocks. >> That didn't fill left some extra space in the 256 bytes, so ACL size >> info and block pointers were put in there. However, ACLs are just a >> side effect of the larger size, not the sole reason. And, ACLs are >> not actually stored in the inode, only block pointers to them are. > > > While the technical statements above are correct, actually, the extended > attribute storage was the primary motivation for getting UFS2 > development kicked off. Since it required rolling the file system > layout, we did 64-bit support at the same time, dropped back in the > birth time, etc. > > Robert N M Watson Ah, sorry, I had it backwards. Scott