> by metadata could br reduced, I'd risk f2fs in production in one system
> here.
Oh, and please, I beg you, consider increasing the hardlink limit to >16
bit - look at other filesystems,. many filesystems thought they could get
away with 16 bit (ext*, xfs, ...) but all of them nowadays support 31 bit
or more for the hardlink count :) Merely 18 bits would probably suffice :)
While 65535 will just work at the moment for me (my largest directory has
~62000 subdirectories, and I can half this wiht some extra work), it's
guaranteed to fail sooner or later.
Thanks for listening (even if you decide against it :).
Greetings,
--
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schm...@schmorp.de
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
