Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3

[Jeff Garzik]

Michael Poole wrote:
> Jeff Garzik writes:
>
> > Theodore Tso wrote:
> > > And I'd also dispute with your "weren't really suited for the original
> > > ext2-style design" comment.  Ext2/3 was always designed to be
> > > extensible from the start, and we've successfully added features quite
> > > successfully for quite a while.
> > Although not the only disk format change, extents are a pretty big
> > one. Will this be the last major on-disk format change?
>
> You keep making "straw that broke the camel's back" type arguments
> without saying why this particular straw (rather than the other
> compatibility-breaking features that are already in ext3) is the one
> that must not be allowed.  Is it a matter of taste, or is there some
> objective threshold that extents cross?

Yes, it's not a small change to the on-disk format.

If you write tools that read an ext3 filesystem, you won't be able to 
read file data at all, without updating your code.

That's a much bigger deal than say 32-bit uids.

	Jeff



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/