Re: choosing the file system block size

[Edgar Fuß <ef%math.uni-bonn.de@localhost>]

> This is reasonable, if your only metric for "optimal" is "amount of
> overhead space required".  (Which may be true in your case, but it
> seems to me to be worth mentioning anyway.)
Yes. It's no so much that the amount of overhead is the only thing I'm
caring about but more that I'd like to know how much the block size
really matters in that respect.

> I'd suggest reading over the source to newfs and/or fsck;
> they know a good deal about that stuff, and are much smaller and more
> comprehensible than the filesystem kernel code.
Thanks for the hint.
Basically, I gave up on that after realising that both "number of blocks"
and "number of data blocks" where actually in units of -- fragments!
There seems to be a lot of stuff in that which is probably perfectly clear
for those actually dealing with FS code, but close to incomprehensible
for a newcomer in that area.

Is there any good book on the subject? The 4.4BSD Book doesn't explain
these details. In fact, It doesn't even mention that files needing indirect
blocks don't use fragments (or I overlooked that).