On 9/6/05, David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > michael chang wrote: > > > Okay, this sounds sane, but at the same time, from a implementational > > point of view, how do you tell which blocks are reserved and which > > arent? > > I thought it wasn't specific blocks, but rather a certain number of > blocks (any blocks) which must be free in order for any write to > succeed. Which is why it makes more sense to me as a mount option. >
Oh okay then. That sounds better - it's not like NTFS's MFT area designation (very annoying). Of course, we'd all like it better if this space is contiguous, but anywhere is fine, so long as the benefits are retained, I guess. (Besides, if the space *isn't* contiguous, logically, it _should_ be possible to make it semi-contigous with the repacker, provided enough space (hopefully this requirement will be very low) exists to repack in the first place.) -- ~Mike - Just my two cents - No man is an island, and no man is unable.
