Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: news.software.nntp,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!twwells!bill From: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) Subject: Re: Poor performance with INN and FreeBSD. Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Organization: None, Mt. Laurel, NJ Message-ID: <Dn5zv3.CnC@twwells.com> References: <311F8C62.4BC4@pluto.njcc.com> <DMu8B6.6Jn@twwells.com> <4gdgc6$ron@olivea.ATC.Olivetti.Com> <4gf2p0$209@fozzie.sun3.iaf.nl> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 06:40:14 GMT Lines: 23 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au news.software.nntp:20074 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:14157 In article <4gf2p0$209@fozzie.sun3.iaf.nl>, Geert Bosch <geert@fozzie.sun3.iaf.nl> wrote: : Is it *really* true that FreeBSD still uses a file-system with linear : directories? Yes, it uses a linear directory. : For these kind of things B-tree's (or similar structures) : are *far* more efficient. And a whole lot more *fragile*. Remember, that a file system needs to be stable under such outrages as pulling the plug and bad disk blocks; it should also have a hope of surviving things like buffering disk controllers that defeat the purpose of synchronous writes.... Not to mention that for many purposes, the efficiency improvement of more complex directory structures is negligible or even negative -- the cost of dicking with the structure can outweigh the order-of-magnitude improvement. I've set followups to comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc only as this is no longer relevant to the nntp group.