"Branko Collin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We also think that the thumbnails should be split up into
> > subdirectories in order to avoid problems with too many files in one
> > directory. A typical user might nowadays easily have several thousands
> > of thumbnails. Most filesystems don't cope well with such large
> > amounts of files in one directory. Our proposal is thus to introduce
> > subdirectories specified by the first letter of the thumbnail name.
> > That would give 64 subdirectories and the thumbs should evenly
> > distribute between them. So, for example a 128x128 sized thumb for
> > ~/photos/me.png would be stored into
> > ~/.thumbnails/normal/c/c6ee772d9e49320e97ec29a7eb5b1697.png
> How do you arrive at 64 subdirectories? Does this work for all
> platforms concerned?
hmm, 64 was bogus of course. We'd either have 16 or, if we'd take the
first two chars, 256 subdirectories. I think it should work for all
platforms but it looks as if the idea will be dropped and we'll most
probably stay with the approach to store all thumbs in one directory.
However please try to keep this discussion on the free-desktop list.
The mailing-list address was included in my first mail regarding this
Gimp-developer mailing list