RE: block size in XFS = hard coded constant?

From: Olaf Frączyk (olaf@cbk.poznan.pl)
Date: Mon Sep 30 2002 - 07:07:57 EST


On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 10:55, L A Walsh wrote:
> Right -- I know it isn't the filesystem block size.
>
> In this day and age, it seems anachronistic. Given the 10% higher block
> density, not only would it yield higher capacities, but should yield higher
> transfer rates, no?
>
> I know it isn't a simple constant switch -- but I wouldn't want to switch
> constants since not all disks should be constrained to the same block size.
>
> Do other file systems have the same limitation? Are there any problems in the
> linux-kernel with non-512 byte blocks?
Hi,

DVD-RAM (2048 bytes block size) works well in linux.
I use ext2 for DVD-RAM.

Regards,

Olaf Fraczyk

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 22:00:44 EST