Matthew Jacob <mjacob@ns.feral.com> writes:


>>8k per inode?  I've got a 2GB filesystem here with over 100k inodes and
>>1.5G used.  This proposal would chew up around 800MB, or about 40% of
>>the available space.  Disk space _isn't_ that cheap.

.Uh, at NASA/Ames it is. Currently 4TB is the disk cache. That will more
>than double.

8k per inode is a lot for a 2GB filesystem. It's an awful lot for a
32M filesystem -- maybe 10%-25%. It's out of the question for a 1.44M
floppy.  Are you proposing a new filesystem type for huge
instalattions doing HSM,m or a change to the same FFS the Rest Of US
use?  The messages from NAS haven't actually said.

If you're talking about a Huge File System, and you hae some idea of
the acccess patterns (both on creation, during pullup from tape, and
references after pullup), there's a good body of ideas (xfs, ...)
that might be applicable and useful.

If you're talking about changing the default bog-standard FFS, then
you've got a *big* uphill battle to sell that, even to people with 2G
filesystems, let alone 200M or 20m or ~2M.