Re: blocksize > 4K in ext2 ?

John Summerfield (
Thu, 21 May 1998 06:56:02 +0800 (WST)

On Wed, 20 May 1998, Sieger Ralf AI wrote:

> On Wed, 20 May 1998, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> > >
> > This brings to mind a question I asked myself last time I saw a thread
> > along this line. Why doesn't someone make a fs just for cases that need
> > large files? It seems to me there is quite a few people who need it for
> > various reasons. This would imho solve the speed loss argument since the
> > people who need the larger files would be the only ones using it.
> Ok I'm currently on a 64Bit fs. Which is at the moment slightly (10-20%)
> slower than ext2 but has a lot of other advantages. The only problem is
> the 2GB limit with an 32Bit integer on x86.
> Well I understand that we can't move generally to 8byte off_t types. Cause
> an old i386 would go down in pain. But is there no way to use such a 8byte
> value by accessing such large files?

Is block addressing an option? IBM uses this with HPFS to cover pretty big
files. An API to turn it on and off you go: addressing by sectors.

John Summerfield for OS/2 support.
Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to