From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jun 1 10:03:37 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA01308 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 1 Jun 1996 10:03:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hda (ip57-max1-fitch.zipnet.net [199.232.245.57]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA01301 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 1996 10:03:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dufault@localhost) by hda (8.6.11/8.6.9) id NAA10369; Sat, 1 Jun 1996 13:05:20 -0400 From: Peter Dufault Message-Id: <199606011705.NAA10369@hda> Subject: Re: Breaking ffs - speed enhancement? To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 13:05:19 -0400 (EDT) Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, dufault@hda.zipnet.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, terry@lambert.org In-Reply-To: <199606011623.CAA23320@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Jun 2, 96 02:23:12 am Reply-to: hdalog@zipnet.net X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > You would still have to keep the update marks somewhere :-). They > should compress very well since they are only 1 bit to begin with > and have a steady state value of 1 :-). You need update marks, but if you don't need to change them from marks to time stamps when the files are closed you reduce the overhead of a file system full of many small files being thrashed open and closed. No, I haven't thought through the benefits and drawbacks - I'll shutup. Note that read-only file systems obviously don't have time stamps, giving me some screwy ideas about how to look at the original problem if it is heavily loaded on the read side. -- Peter Dufault Real-Time Machine Control and Simulation HD Associates, Inc. Voice: 508 433 6936 dufault@hda.com Fax: 508 433 5267