From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep  4 12:43:00 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C0F16A420
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Sun,  4 Sep 2005 12:43:00 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua)
Received: from postman.atlantis.dp.ua (postman.atlantis.dp.ua [193.108.47.1])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE2D443D46
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Sun,  4 Sep 2005 12:42:59 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua)
Received: from smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (smtp.atlantis.dp.ua [193.108.46.231])
	by postman.atlantis.dp.ua (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j84Cgr9L059515; 
	Sun, 4 Sep 2005 15:42:53 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua)
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2005 15:42:53 +0300 (EEST)
From: Dmitry Pryanishnikov <dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@haven.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: <44924.1125814452@phk.freebsd.dk>
Message-ID: <20050904154109.I53303@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua>
References: <44924.1125814452@phk.freebsd.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/85503: panic: wrong dirclust using msdosfs in RELENG_6 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 12:43:00 -0000


Hello!

On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>> Making the hashes be 64bit is pointless since no filesystems will
>>> have that many inodes and it still doesn't solve the problem properly.
>>
>> Never? :-)
>
> Never.

  Never say "never" ;)

> Even on very fast storage media, fsck would take for ever and you
> wouldn't be able to run it in parallel.

  It will be a shame if e.g. some Linux's fs or NTFS will support > 4 Gfiles
and we will be unable to handle it just because of architectural limitations!


Sincerely, Dmitry
-- 
Atlantis ISP, System Administrator
e-mail:  dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua
nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE