[Zope] DirectoryStorage and UFS2
kgunders at teamcool.net
Wed May 19 13:32:25 EDT 2004
On Wednesday 19 May 2004 11:18 am, Matt Hamilton wrote:
> Ken Gunderson wrote:
> > I am unsure whether UFS2 would best utilize the "chunky" or "busy"
> > options. The 64 bit pointers allow for up to 65K subdirs w/in a
> > dir, correct? So the large number of subdirs under chunky format
> > could be handled. Dirhash and dirpref can deal can cope with large
> > numbers of files per directory, correct. But then doesn't UFS2
> > still use more linear model?
> > Any insights from the FBSD/filesystem gurus would be appreciated.
> We use DirectoryStorage on UFS+softupdates on FreeBSD 4.x and use
> bushy. I did a few simple tests of bushy vs. chunky and didn't get
> any significant difference. Whether this holds true for UFS2 or not
> I don't know.
FWIW-- I did a few informal tests as well. Chunky "feels" a bit faster,
but I didn't test with huge dataset, so I'm not sure about scalability.
Chunky also seems to require a bit less disk space, e.g. virgin
dirstorage is 26MB vs 21MB. Guess I'll play it safe and stick with
Thanks for the input.
GPG Key-- 9F5179FD
"Freedom begins between the ears." -- Edward Abbey
More information about the Zope